Discuss Hacksaw Ridge
Discuss → Movies → Hacksaw Ridge → General
Corny, and overrated
posted by Badlands1STAFFMOD on February 18, 2017 at 5:39 PM
I went into this wanting to like it, knowing it was a true story..
The first hour is a home-front dramatic boring soap opera, then corny spoon-fed humor during boot camp with Vince Vaughn as the fat DI! Not once was there an F-bomb anywhere in the movie, not quite WWII era grunt realism. "gee-golly gosh-darn"
Next we have a Law&Order case type movie, I was checking my watch at that point maybe over an hour in.. I really felt nothing for this character given the direction.
Now we get to battle, with a character I really don't feel for, here's Mel's redundant video-game like battle scenes: Machine-gun/Flame-thrower/grenade*Machine-gun/Flame-thrower/grenade*Machine-gun/Flame-thrower/grenade*Machine-gun/Flame-thrower/grenade*Machine-gun/Flame-thrower/grenade*Machine-gun/Flame-thrower/grenade*Machine-gun/Flame-thrower/grenade* ...Of course with some CGI thrown in, and childish zombie type jump-scares. I don't want to hear that's how it was, yes battles have highs and lulls, but this fast paced editing is just what a 12yr old would eat up. But yet we are not playing COD, we're supposed to be watching an Oscar worthy movie?? Ya right, I'll forward all my bank account on paypal to anyone who wants it if this wins an Oscar.
The soundtrack was lacking, the most generic type classic scores playing.
There was no art in this film, just a overlong drawn out made-for-tv style movie..
What happened to great anti-war movies like: Platoon, Thin Red Line, Stalingrad 93', Hamburger Hill, Beach Red, Long days Dying, Come and See, Cross Of Iron, Rescue dawn, Rumor Of War, and 84 Charlie Mopic? All these new war movies are so watered down, and comedic like SPR, Windtalkers, or Hacksaw, all I can think of is the producers want the kids to buy tickets, as adults don't pay off anymore.
I have nothing but respect for the vets this movie was based off, I just wish some better director got a hold of the story, or a full feature documentary was done on it.
Reply by MrRadical
on February 28, 2017 at 1:53 PM
Huh, what the fսck do you have against me?
Reply by NoVaNY-Cinematico
on February 28, 2017 at 2:26 PM
Look everyone is entitled to an opinion. But the word "masterpiece" is twirled around so cavalierly that it seems to have lost its meaning.
What makes this film a "masterpiece" in your opinion? My intention is not to bash or troll but asking in the spirit of lively discussion.
As to my own definition, it would be a film that delves (deep) into the human condition (warts & all), is narratively & technically adventurous & innovative. A film with very few characters & minimal (or better yet, no plot) can be a "masterpiece" in my opinion. This is a good example: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0073198/
And this: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0052893/
And this one too!: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0069467/
So many "masterpieces"
!!!
Reply by MrRadical
on February 28, 2017 at 2:45 PM
A masterpiece can be either a movie that raises the bar much higher in a single category like say Mad Max: Fury Road or all the parts fit together perfectly in a way that shows great passion and has no definitive flaw.
Or it's simply mindblowing like Fight Club or Enemy.
Reply by Heisenberg12
on February 28, 2017 at 5:00 PM
For me a masterpiece is a well made film that is made with so much attention to detail that everything is nearly perfect (editing is crucial here), but also can be one that has a deeper, more profound, inspirational, meaningful message or purpose to it that can result in shifts in thought, perspective, and the way future films are made. But basically, it's the premium quality work(s) of a filmmaker's library or body of work. It's near perfect, masterful, and incredibly good.
I only have about 5-10 movies I could consider masterpieces.
Breaking Bad is a good example of a masterpiece for TV. Heat is arguably a masterpiece for film.
Reply by Wolf359
on February 28, 2017 at 5:19 PM
STOP referencing IMDB they're the reason we're stranded here in the first place. Lol
Reply by Heisenberg12
on February 28, 2017 at 7:44 PM
You originally stated, "an Oscar", since which it seems you've since deleted, likely an attempt to reconfigure your erroneous prediction, in which case I win as expected.
Since when was Editing not a significant Oscar anyway? No movie has won best picture without at least a nomination for editing for decades. The last was in 1980. Also, of the 64 films that have won best picture Oscars since 1952, 32 have also won the Oscar for editing. Also, where is it cemented in the Academy what constitutes a significant Oscar? Is there a handbook? Editing is huge and just as vital as directing and screenplay in making a good film. Again, refer to the statistical fact in editing being a must for a movie to win best picture. Even screenplay can be missed on occasion, but pretty sure editing is a requirement every time, thus making it truly more significant.
Either way, 2 Oscars, I win. Editing was a big surprise, I admit. I was expecting Sound Editing and Sound Mixing and assumed La La Land had that. Even more impressive and respectable of an award, and yes a significant one.
Reply by JD
on March 1, 2017 at 12:25 PM
I absolutely agree, what was all that "never win an Oscar crap?" where are they now? IMDb Top Rated Movies #142 | **Won 2 Oscars. **Another 41 wins & 83 nominations.
It's good to see all of the infantile single minded @ssholes have jumped on board here to do the same crap, they live sad pathetic lives. Best not to respond and just scroll on by their BS.
Reply by Badlands1
on March 5, 2017 at 12:18 AM
Nope. That "chump" said it would win best picture. And he bet me $1000... where is he now?
Suicide squad won an oscar, does that make these pictures great?
Reply by InHiding
on March 11, 2017 at 1:42 AM
I tried to watch this twice but couldn't get past 20 minutes. The lead is so annoying and the character he is playing is so ridiculously naive. It may be a realistic portrayal but I'm just not interested in seeing anything like that anymore.
Reply by Wolf359
on March 11, 2017 at 2:14 AM
Who cares if he's naive or not ? He risked his life to save 75 men. That makes him a hero. Put yourself in his shoes, what would you have done ?
On the other hand, if you have prejudice and can't make it past 20 minutes then this movie is most probably not for you.
Reply by InHiding
on March 11, 2017 at 5:01 AM
He probably is a hero and that's cool. I'm not really able to put myself in his shoes 'cause I just couldn't watch more than the very beginning. I just consider the beginning so painful... I felt like watching a bad episode of MacGyver (the original preachy ones) for some reason and I had to stop.
Reply by Heisenberg12
on March 11, 2017 at 6:21 AM
You're an idiot.
Reply by lexo9
on March 17, 2017 at 8:05 PM
great. honest opinion. everyone is praising this film in reviews so much but its so overrated. thats why they took down imdb boards. so that true opinions about movies doesnt come out
Reply by theugly
on May 12, 2017 at 9:44 PM
based on a true story.... Just like The Revenant it should be labeled as fiction.
Reply by EisWarren
on July 17, 2017 at 4:44 AM
I work with WW2 vets everyday- the stories are horrific- if you're lucky enough for them to open up and share them. As it was put to me by an Okinawa marine survivor- when in situations like what occurred on that ridge, being trapped and all, you'd be surprised what you would end up doing to survive. According to that vet, picking up and using half a torso as a shield wasn't just a somewhat common occurrence, but nothing compared to what others had done. He started crying so I didn't ask.