Latest Entertainment News Headlines

Review: Independence Day: Resurgence

Independence Day: Resurgence
06.24.2016
5 10

Independence Day resurgence review Roland Emmerich liam hemsworth

PLOT: 20 years after we shut down an alien invasion, the world lives in harmony and has integrated the alien technology into our rebuilding effort. But, as we probably guessed, those aliens haven't been licking their wounds during the hiatus; they're coming back for Round 2, more intent than ever to wipe us out.

REVIEW: Is it possible for me to be disappointed with INDEPENDENCE DAY: RESURGENCE? It's not like I have much affection for the first one; it was a thing, I guess, when it first came out, but it hasn't aged too well. And I haven't exactly been yearning for a follow-up, especially after all this time. Still, there's no denying the original's iconic moments - those shadows looming, those landmarks exploding - are ingrained in my mind. Like it or not, that movie left an impression; it paved the way for a new breed of disaster cinema (several of them made by ID4 helmer Roland Emmerich) and even though it's corny as hell, there's an earnestness and energy to it that resonates. So a small part of me was admittedly curious to see RESURGENCE; if the master of bashing Earth to bits can recapture a little bit of that magic from 20 years ago, maybe we'd have a real spectacle on our hands. After all, we've seen the planet devastated about 100 times since 1996, so it's going to take a lot to wow us at this point.

Independence Day resurgence review Roland Emmerich liam hemsworth

RESURGENCE doesn't wow, though. It has less grandeur than the original; in this film, an alien invasion is sort of a ho-hum event. The wow factor is important in a movie like this, which aims to give us some of that good old fashioned apocalyptic destruction but ends up feeling like a half-hearted effort. A bunch of cities get wiped out, no doubt, but Emmerich - who has staged these kinds of sequences with demented vigor in the past - doesn't appear to be into it; the destruction is swift and indifferent. There are only so many times a man can kill a billion people, after all - is it possible Emmerich has grown weary of incinerating us?

Not unlike the recent WARCRAFT (which this is just a little bit better than), ID:R spends a lot of time overcomplicated its plot with too many characters and scenes of exposition when what it all boils down to is very simple. 20 years after our civilization defeated an intruding alien race (thanks, computer virus!), the fearsome buggers come back for revenge. In the meantime we've had plenty of time to prepare; we've taken the technology they left behind to build bigger buildings and fancier transportation systems, as well as enhance our military might. We've even got an outpost set up on the moon, just in case. Naturally, all that time we spent preparing really hasn't actually prepared us at all for what's up the alien's sleeve now, which is a spaceship so huge it takes up like 1/4 of the planet. When it arrives it ends up sucking up half of China and England because it brings its own gravity; the cities eventually come crumbling down in horrifying fashion. The ship then settles over the Atlantic ocean so it drill into the Earth's core, which it uses for energy. Why it doesn't first just decimate all of our cities and then get down to business so it won't have any resistance is one of those questions you don't ask, but obviously the aliens don't forward plan too well either.

Independence Day resurgence review Roland Emmerich liam hemsworth

Intriguing ideas that the movie presents - like the fact we've rebuilt our cities, transportation systems and weapons utilizing the aliens' technology - are left unexplored satisfyingly; we see a few helicopters and planes that have been updated with extraterrestrial goodies, but instead of diving deep into the possibilities of this notion Emmerich gives us passing glances at them. He's in too much of a rush to cram everything else in. There's even another alien race that figures into the plot, but the wonderment of that is shoved aside. (We'll have to wait for the next film to get into all that, I suppose.) What Emmerich likes, in this movie and many of his others, are scenes where quirky characters interact with each other, urgently explaining the situation ad nauseam; this would not be a problem if Emmerich had any knack for comedy or convincing dialogue, but he doesn't, so most of the sequences where actors stand around conversing are either completely lame or thoroughly boring.

Dealing with actors has never (ever) been one of Emmerich's strong points, and here the cast is capable and that's about it. The newcomers are barely given any distinguishing character traits; hardly any thought, really. Liam Hemsworth is charismatic enough as what I think is supposed to be a "bad boy pilot" role, although his brashness is quite PG-13. Jessie T. Usher's Dylan - the son of Will Smith's Steven Hiller, now deceased - has practically nothing at all to do; his character has a beef with Hemsworth's character but that's resolved so quickly that it doesn't seem worth bringing up in the first place. Maika Monroe is fairly dull as President Whitmore's daughter; she looks vaguely worried about the world coming to a fiery end. The returning actors are welcome, however. Jeff Goldblum can always be counted upon to add a little subversion to the proceedings with his wry line-readings (although admittedly even he looks a tad bored here), and Pullman's erratic take on President Whitmore - who now has visions of the impending alien attack - gives the character an intriguing new layer. Judd Hirsch, god bless him, is actually pretty amusing as David's perpetually kvetching father; he at least he still looks like he's having a good time. Brent Spiner steals a few scenes as the kooky Dr. Okun (who has been in a coma since the last film), but even he can't quite rise above Emmerich's pitifully dorky sense of humor.

Independence Day resurgence review Roland Emmerich liam hemsworth

And I'm not even mentioning most of the cast; there are plenty more characters and subplots, the majority of them unimportant. The film's pace is jostled by the fact that it has to keep cutting to all these different people, it never finds itself in a comfortable rhythm. Emmerich is evidently compelled to toss about a dozen protagonists our way when he might've fared much better with about half that. (There are at least two "comic relief" doofuses here who never say anything funny, and an African warlord figures into the proceedings in a baffling manner.) INDEPENDENCE DAY: RESURGENCE is only two hours long, short for a movie like this, and it often comes across as awkwardly overstuffed, like Emmerich was given a two hour time limit and had to fit two and a half hours worth of material into it.

But how is the carnage and action, you ask? That's why we're here, after all. It's fine, but never truly rousing. The alien ship's arrival looks cool and some of the destruction is vivid, but again, at this point it's rather hard to make this stuff really leap off the screen, so many times have we seen variations of it. (The movie never comes close to that first major sequence of destruction in INDEPENDENCE DAY, which actually did feel like a remarkable event.) The many aerial dogfights are finely executed but repetitive. ID:R only really comes to life during its big climax, which pits our surviving forces versus a pissed-off alien queen. There are a handful of really enjoyable moments during this standoff - I wish it had come way earlier - but it's too little, too late for INDEPENDENCE DAY: RESURGENCE, which at that point has established that while the aliens may be bigger and better, this followup certainly is not.

CLICK IMAGE TO OPEN GALLERY & SEE MORE PICS...

Source: JoBlo.com

RECOMMENDED MOVIE NEWS

MORE FUN FROM AROUND THE WEB

Strikeback
Not registered? Sign-up!
Or

+1
12:54AM on 06/27/2016

My WTF moment in IDR: Okun and Isaacs....The movie had 5 writers & depth was lacking!

This was my WTF moment in IDR. (SPOILER) Did anyone else know prior to Dr. Isaacs' death scene that he and Dr. Okun were a couple? I did not care they were gay, but nothing told me prior to this final moment of Dr. Isaacs that he and Okun were a homosexual couple. Both characters were in the original, but there was nothing to suggest they were a homosexual couple. In fact, I think Dr. Isaacs maybe had only two lines, "It's time" and "Open launch tunnel". In IDR, Dr. Isaacs has been taking care
This was my WTF moment in IDR. (SPOILER) Did anyone else know prior to Dr. Isaacs' death scene that he and Dr. Okun were a couple? I did not care they were gay, but nothing told me prior to this final moment of Dr. Isaacs that he and Okun were a homosexual couple. Both characters were in the original, but there was nothing to suggest they were a homosexual couple. In fact, I think Dr. Isaacs maybe had only two lines, "It's time" and "Open launch tunnel". In IDR, Dr. Isaacs has been taking care of Dr. Okun during his 20 year coma, but this doesn't exactly say they're in-love. So Isaacs watered Okun plants and tried to make him a sweater......sorry but none of this equals being a gay couple. I acknowledge that knitting a sweater for another guy in a coma is a little weird if your not a couple, but this does not scream "homosexual". Dialogue of them saying shit like "I missed our romantic nights together" means they were and still are a fucking couple!!! Come on! This movie had five.....that's 5....WRITERS. How did this shit not get written correctly? There was no depth in this film. Was there depth in ID4? Not the highest quality, but there was depth in each main character.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
+1
12:51AM on 06/27/2016

IDR marketing web videos had more story, and better ones than the film

I did not like IDR, which saddens me to say. Was I Surprised? Not at all. However, I did not want to see the film bomb at the box office. IDR is way better than any Transformers movie and yet it will never bank like those shit films. Fox's web videos for IDR, especially "War of 1996" had way more story to them then IDR did. "Way of 1996" talked about Steven Hiller's dead, the crashed alien ship on Las Vegas, the cities rebuilding, alien technology used, alien defense systems, and the best
I did not like IDR, which saddens me to say. Was I Surprised? Not at all. However, I did not want to see the film bomb at the box office. IDR is way better than any Transformers movie and yet it will never bank like those shit films. Fox's web videos for IDR, especially "War of 1996" had way more story to them then IDR did. "Way of 1996" talked about Steven Hiller's dead, the crashed alien ship on Las Vegas, the cities rebuilding, alien technology used, alien defense systems, and the best part....the continuing alien battles in Africa, which would've been a part story than the ones in IDR.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
2:27PM on 06/25/2016

online job

My last pay check was $9599 working 12 hours a week online. My sisters friend has been averaging 15k for months now and she works about 20 hours a week. I can't believe how easy it was once I tried it out. This is what I do.... www.earnmore9.com
My last pay check was $9599 working 12 hours a week online. My sisters friend has been averaging 15k for months now and she works about 20 hours a week. I can't believe how easy it was once I tried it out. This is what I do.... www.earnmore9.com
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
2:05PM on 06/25/2016

WELL

The movie was freaking awesome, effects were amazing, CGI amazing, aliens amazing, action amazing. Thats why we want to see a ID4 film. But in the same token it was rushed well felt very rushed, the plot was mehh and could of been better. But I'm thinking this was also do its to shorter running time the old one was 145mins this was 45 mins less. The actors in the movie were terrible. And there was way to much comedy this time around. But overall the campyness and awesomeness was still there and
The movie was freaking awesome, effects were amazing, CGI amazing, aliens amazing, action amazing. Thats why we want to see a ID4 film. But in the same token it was rushed well felt very rushed, the plot was mehh and could of been better. But I'm thinking this was also do its to shorter running time the old one was 145mins this was 45 mins less. The actors in the movie were terrible. And there was way to much comedy this time around. But overall the campyness and awesomeness was still there and I loved every moment of it. I think its just so much happening that you need to see it again. Also when ID4-3 comes out I hope they make that one longer.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
+0
1:34PM on 06/25/2016
Still going to see it for nostalgia sake. Damn Hollywood.
Still going to see it for nostalgia sake. Damn Hollywood.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
10:31AM on 06/25/2016
"it was a thing, I guess, when it first came out, but it hasn't aged too well."

I don't know about that. I would say that the special effects in the first one hold up pretty damn well. I've seem movies more recent that had much worse effects. Some great model work in that film.

I have to stay neutral on this for now since I'll be seeing it tomorrow.
"it was a thing, I guess, when it first came out, but it hasn't aged too well."

I don't know about that. I would say that the special effects in the first one hold up pretty damn well. I've seem movies more recent that had much worse effects. Some great model work in that film.

I have to stay neutral on this for now since I'll be seeing it tomorrow.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
2:07PM on 06/25/2016
Seriously the first one aged very well and i can watch it constanly and never get sick of it. I think you'll enjoy this one alot its very different. Just it was rushed I felt and the actors they picked could of been better.
Seriously the first one aged very well and i can watch it constanly and never get sick of it. I think you'll enjoy this one alot its very different. Just it was rushed I felt and the actors they picked could of been better.
+1
2:23AM on 06/25/2016
This movie sucked ass! One of the worst films of the year.
This movie sucked ass! One of the worst films of the year.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
6:34PM on 06/24/2016

Did not like it.

I saw the movie a couple of days ago and Eric's review is pretty much spot on. Although it's a 4/10 for me. I like the first one a lot, but I was going with expectations lowered after the trailers. The movie dissapoints. It takes itself too seriously, more than the first one. There's not much comedy on it (whereas the first one had a lot of funny moments) and the fun factor it's not much.
On top of this, the score is awful, awful. I mean, when the credits start rolling, only then we listen to
I saw the movie a couple of days ago and Eric's review is pretty much spot on. Although it's a 4/10 for me. I like the first one a lot, but I was going with expectations lowered after the trailers. The movie dissapoints. It takes itself too seriously, more than the first one. There's not much comedy on it (whereas the first one had a lot of funny moments) and the fun factor it's not much.
On top of this, the score is awful, awful. I mean, when the credits start rolling, only then we listen to the suite from the first film and you get to think (I wish this kind of score was put in this movie).
And finally, the movie is all over the place, the editing is not good at all, it doesn't flow naturally and there is no tension building at all, so when the big fight sequences come, you are not too invested in them.
Too bad. It was an ok premise, and it could have definitely been better. Count me disappointed.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
4:28PM on 06/24/2016

So the generic looking movie gets a generic score...

Seems about right. It didn't look horrible but it didn't look like it was going to be that good either. Pretty mediocre.
Seems about right. It didn't look horrible but it didn't look like it was going to be that good either. Pretty mediocre.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
4:26PM on 06/24/2016
I wish I could say I was surprised. ID4 was unlike anything I'd seen at the time, and is still one of the best examples of citywide destruction put on screen. And cheese and all, I bought it. Outside of Goldblum and Pullman, I just don't feel like the marketing team (and indeed, it sounds like filmmakers) put in the work to give this movie the same urgency as the last one. And the effects aren't groundbreaking. Or even as breathtaking as the trailer for 2012.
I wish I could say I was surprised. ID4 was unlike anything I'd seen at the time, and is still one of the best examples of citywide destruction put on screen. And cheese and all, I bought it. Outside of Goldblum and Pullman, I just don't feel like the marketing team (and indeed, it sounds like filmmakers) put in the work to give this movie the same urgency as the last one. And the effects aren't groundbreaking. Or even as breathtaking as the trailer for 2012.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
+1
4:10PM on 06/24/2016

Spoilers

Saw it this afternoon. It wasn't horrible.but not great. Just didn't have the fun factor of the first. Most of the characters are 2 dimensional so you don't really care about them. David Spiner stole every scene he was in. The effects and action were good. There was a bazaar scene with Robert Loggia. He has no lines and has just a couple shots. This was his last role and it was pointless. The sequel this series is headed going to be total shit I'm afraid. Actually, the 5 rating is pretty
Saw it this afternoon. It wasn't horrible.but not great. Just didn't have the fun factor of the first. Most of the characters are 2 dimensional so you don't really care about them. David Spiner stole every scene he was in. The effects and action were good. There was a bazaar scene with Robert Loggia. He has no lines and has just a couple shots. This was his last role and it was pointless. The sequel this series is headed going to be total shit I'm afraid. Actually, the 5 rating is pretty accurate . And that's coming from someone who really enjoyed the first one. Don't waste your time on 3D or IMAX, you'll be really pissed for wasting your cash.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
3:47PM on 06/24/2016

Why are people complaining about the reviewer?

Eric didn't like it, so what? Why even bother coming to the site and reading the review if your just going to disrespect the views and opinion of one person? Also you're faulting him for doing his job. Just because he didn't like the first one doesn't mean he's banned from reviewing a sequel. If we do that, let's ban every critic that hated the early fast and Furious entries. Criticism is bias. You go into a movie not liking something you saw in the trailer and you're going to point that out
Eric didn't like it, so what? Why even bother coming to the site and reading the review if your just going to disrespect the views and opinion of one person? Also you're faulting him for doing his job. Just because he didn't like the first one doesn't mean he's banned from reviewing a sequel. If we do that, let's ban every critic that hated the early fast and Furious entries. Criticism is bias. You go into a movie not liking something you saw in the trailer and you're going to point that out and it's going to add to your frustrations. He did not like it, he even says he is not a huge fan of the original or of Emmerich's other disaster pieces. So you put those together, he's probably not going to like this. I found the review pretty solid and it reaffirmed my suspicions. Although of course I am not a huge fan of Independence Day. Sure I like it. I own it but haven't watch it that much. For a span of five maybe 6 years I watched it once a year. Now I couldn't even tell you the last time I watched it. I was pretty against this movie, so this review probably was more for me than it was for other people. For all of those those who absolutely love Independence Day and we're all for seeing more destruction, throw caution to the wind and go see it. Hopefully you'll enjoy it. For people like me obviously we could probably stay in doors or see something else this weekend.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
3:32PM on 06/24/2016

Stopped reading after first paragraph

The first movie has overall aged very well. The use of practical effects in the devastation scenes made sure of that.
The first movie has overall aged very well. The use of practical effects in the devastation scenes made sure of that.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
2:45PM on 06/24/2016
I've learned not to ultimately listen to Joblo's reviews. Most of the time they're biased. Just wait, they will give The new ghostbusters a 9/10. Because it is apparent they want that movie to happen.
I've learned not to ultimately listen to Joblo's reviews. Most of the time they're biased. Just wait, they will give The new ghostbusters a 9/10. Because it is apparent they want that movie to happen.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
2:44PM on 06/24/2016

Lack of character

I agree that this movie lacked any character development. Part of the reason I liked the first movie is because I cared about the characters. That wasn't happening this time around.
I agree that this movie lacked any character development. Part of the reason I liked the first movie is because I cared about the characters. That wasn't happening this time around.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
1:46PM on 06/24/2016
why the hell if you didnt like the first one would you even bother to review the second one ? Even if the movie is good its still not something you would like or give a good review of. Can we get someone on here who actually likes these movies to give a review? come on joblo this a long awaited blockbuster and you get someone who obviously hates the series to review it? looks like we are better off getting the reviews from another site.
why the hell if you didnt like the first one would you even bother to review the second one ? Even if the movie is good its still not something you would like or give a good review of. Can we get someone on here who actually likes these movies to give a review? come on joblo this a long awaited blockbuster and you get someone who obviously hates the series to review it? looks like we are better off getting the reviews from another site.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
2:01PM on 06/24/2016
So, basically, what you're asking for is a positive review. Don't be such a sheep. Besides, this piece of shit is getting negative reviews pretty much allround.
So, basically, what you're asking for is a positive review. Don't be such a sheep. Besides, this piece of shit is getting negative reviews pretty much allround.
2:10PM on 06/25/2016
I agree on this too. I wasn't expecting a well acted movie. But i still think the actors could of been better. I didn't really care for them or if they died. The asian girl was hot though LOL.
I agree on this too. I wasn't expecting a well acted movie. But i still think the actors could of been better. I didn't really care for them or if they died. The asian girl was hot though LOL.
+1
1:34PM on 06/24/2016

IDR- 6/10 I was a fan of the first film, and had low expectations for this sequel. Question: Did everything in IDR happen in just 1 day????

Independence Day: Resurgence delivers fun and exciting action, in a movie which is less of a movie and more of a the treatment outline for a movie.
ID4 wasn't afraid to take it's time, spend more time on characters, and more time on tension building up to rememberable action sequences, or to wow us with gorgeous visual images. ID4 was about 2 hours and 30 minutes long, and the invasion happens over 3 days. IDR is almost 30 minutes SHORTER (about 115 minutes) than the original, which ultimately
Independence Day: Resurgence delivers fun and exciting action, in a movie which is less of a movie and more of a the treatment outline for a movie.
ID4 wasn't afraid to take it's time, spend more time on characters, and more time on tension building up to rememberable action sequences, or to wow us with gorgeous visual images. ID4 was about 2 hours and 30 minutes long, and the invasion happens over 3 days. IDR is almost 30 minutes SHORTER (about 115 minutes) than the original, which ultimately hurts the film in the end. Also, I'm pretty sure the invasion in IDR happens over the course of ONE SINGLE DAY, which is impossible given how much happens and how much traveling people go through in the film. From Earth to the moon and then back to Earth, or from the Atlantic Ocean to the Nevada desert! IDR jumps from scene to scene without taking a minute to even pause and let us take things in or even slightly care. In ID4, when the First Lady dies, the scene is emotionally sad, thanks largely to the music of David Arnold, but also because we've spent enough personal time with these characters to care. In IDR when a "sad" death scene happens near the end it's between a couple who I had absolutely no clue were even a couple to begin with! Speaking of film composure David Arnold, it's a damn shame David is retired from film composing, because the music of IDR had none of the musical impact that ID4 had.....zero! The only music theme they kept was the main end credits theme.
It blows my mind that IDR cost 200 million dollars to make, cause ID4 looked way more expensive than it's sequel. I'm sure the money was spent on CGI and creating detailed sets it's just a shame the movie jumps through scenes way too quickly for us to even notice them or appreciate the time, effort, and money it took to build them.
One of ID4 most timeless scenes was the epic destruction sequence of NY, LA, and DC. It saddens me to say this, but if you've seen the trailers and one or two TV spots for IDR, chances are you've probably seen about 75 to 80% of city destruction scenes. This sequence is much shorter than ID4 and has less of an impact. In ID4, it mattered that millions of people were being killed by this group of aliens. In IDR there isn't enough shown to make us even realize how much destruction the aliens actually caused this time around, which had to be almost half the planet.
No film is without sin. Every film has a flaw or many flaws. ID4 and it's sequel both have plenty of flaws. However, I am amazed at how every character in IDR has a sixth sense about all events happening in other scenes in other locations they did not witness. One character loses their parents in the invasion, this character was the only witness to their death, yet one person comes up to them minutes later and gives their condolences even though they had no way of knowing what had just happened a whole ocean away. This has to be mentioned, because the film is credited with not 1 or 2 but with 5 writers. Yet this film is plagued with enough plot holes to fill an entire trilogy.
I will admit, IDR first 30 to 40 minutes was a blast to watch. It was when I realized the alien city destruction scene was over and most of the shots were shown in the ads that I became disappointed. Not completely sure why Roland Emmerich was so quick to get through this whole film. His world-wide destruction film 2012 had far superior destruction sequences than IDR. Like I said IDR cost about $200 million to make, and I don't see where all that money went, especially when a lot of the film is CGI. ID4 had full scale models of the White House being blown up, that's expensive and far more astonishing to watch. Maybe if the film wasn't so eggar to zip through everything I would've seen where all this money went?
Did I expect IDR to be an awesome film? No, I actually went with low expectations. If you loved and enjoy ID4 than see IDR...with low expectations.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
2:12PM on 06/25/2016
I agree with you on this for sure. It felt so rushed me and my friend said the same thing. It felt like things were missing too. Like bam the aliens were here and shit starts going down. I also think this was because of the shorter runtime. I wished it was longer these movies should be longer.
I agree with you on this for sure. It felt so rushed me and my friend said the same thing. It felt like things were missing too. Like bam the aliens were here and shit starts going down. I also think this was because of the shorter runtime. I wished it was longer these movies should be longer.
12:43PM on 06/24/2016
The people that saw Central Intelligence last week have something to see this week then.
The people that saw Central Intelligence last week have something to see this week then.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
12:54PM on 06/24/2016
bwahahaha +1
bwahahaha +1
12:29PM on 06/24/2016
As soon as I saw the name of the reviewer I didn't bother reading the review, I just guessed "low score", scrolled down and there it was.

I'm not saying he's wrong, but I'm learning that I just do not share his views. That and I think he's wrong. 😉

I'll read this review after I've seen the film. If true to form if he rates it low I'll probably really enjoyed it.

(Never used to bother who the reviewer was before, I just accepted them as Joblo reviews, generic-like. Then I read
As soon as I saw the name of the reviewer I didn't bother reading the review, I just guessed "low score", scrolled down and there it was.

I'm not saying he's wrong, but I'm learning that I just do not share his views. That and I think he's wrong. 😉

I'll read this review after I've seen the film. If true to form if he rates it low I'll probably really enjoyed it.

(Never used to bother who the reviewer was before, I just accepted them as Joblo reviews, generic-like. Then I read a load of ridiculously low score reviews for films I loved. Maybe that was his sneaky plan. Maybe I've walked into his bad-review trap.

If it turns out he's right then I'll apologise for this comment - if I disagree again I'll start going elsewhere for reviews.

Sorry for this negative comment (hope it doesn't count as trolling?) just I'm starting to think the review needs to lighten up and start going to see films he wants to like and maybe not critique films in such a negative way.

Again, I've not read the review, and I'll apologise if I agree with it.

Dammit I'm grumpy today - must be Brexit (I voted to remain in dammit)

Anyway, this turned into a rant post - my bad. (I'm giving it a green light to off balance the negative review regardless.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
1:26PM on 06/24/2016
I felt he told too much about the film instead of actually reviewing it.
I felt he told too much about the film instead of actually reviewing it.
1:48PM on 06/24/2016
he obviously doesnt like roland emmerich so why even review the movie ? biased from the get go
he obviously doesnt like roland emmerich so why even review the movie ? biased from the get go
2:03PM on 06/24/2016
"Again, I've not read the review, and I'll apologise if I agree with it."

Next time just don't write until you've seen the film, you'll save everyone an eye roll.
"Again, I've not read the review, and I'll apologise if I agree with it."

Next time just don't write until you've seen the film, you'll save everyone an eye roll.
12:26PM on 06/24/2016
The first sucked and this looks horrendous. My money goes to Blake Lively's bikini this weekend.
The first sucked and this looks horrendous. My money goes to Blake Lively's bikini this weekend.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
3:05PM on 06/24/2016
Money well spent...
Money well spent...
3:05PM on 06/24/2016
Money well spent...
Money well spent...
12:18PM on 06/24/2016
No surprise here, the first one was a shitty movie with great special effects (at the time). Funny how it bas become a 'classic" now unless you were 8 years old in 96, everybody seemed to hate that Flick.
No surprise here, the first one was a shitty movie with great special effects (at the time). Funny how it bas become a 'classic" now unless you were 8 years old in 96, everybody seemed to hate that Flick.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
11:45AM on 06/24/2016
It's a shame, but expected. I think summer movies in general have been generally stale. Even when I saw The Nice Guys, which I really enjoyed, I felt like all the best parts were shown in the trailer. I think this is why many people are turning to TV to still have a sense of suspense to a degree. I'll still see this, but I fully expected to not bring back the nostalgia of the original. It's a different time, nonetheless, I'm sure it won't be a horrible way to kill a couple hours.
It's a shame, but expected. I think summer movies in general have been generally stale. Even when I saw The Nice Guys, which I really enjoyed, I felt like all the best parts were shown in the trailer. I think this is why many people are turning to TV to still have a sense of suspense to a degree. I'll still see this, but I fully expected to not bring back the nostalgia of the original. It's a different time, nonetheless, I'm sure it won't be a horrible way to kill a couple hours.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
View All Comments

Latest Entertainment News Headlines


Top
Loading...

Featured Youtube Videos

Views and Counting

Movie Hottie Of The Week

More