3db Audioholic Slumlord Jan 5, 2012 #1 I went to the theater last week to see this flick. It was nice to get out of the house. I will definately add this one to my BR collection when its released. Humour, special effects, a mindless plot, and lots of action is always worthy of entertainment.
I went to the theater last week to see this flick. It was nice to get out of the house. I will definately add this one to my BR collection when its released. Humour, special effects, a mindless plot, and lots of action is always worthy of entertainment.
j_garcia Audioholic Jedi Jan 5, 2012 #2 I enjoyed the first one, and I am a fan of many of Guy Ritchie's films, so I want to see this one as well.
I enjoyed the first one, and I am a fan of many of Guy Ritchie's films, so I want to see this one as well.
lsiberian Audioholic Overlord Jan 5, 2012 #3 j_garcia said: I enjoyed the first one, and I am a fan of many of Guy Ritchie's films, so I want to see this one as well. Click to expand... I enjoyed it. Worth a visit IMO.
j_garcia said: I enjoyed the first one, and I am a fan of many of Guy Ritchie's films, so I want to see this one as well. Click to expand... I enjoyed it. Worth a visit IMO.
skizzerflake Audioholic Field Marshall Jan 5, 2012 #4 I've seen both movies and enjoyed the crash-and-bang FX, along with the humorous characterizations. I also have read a bunch of A C Doyle's Holmes stories. I like the movies as long as I can keep telling myself that there's NO, repeat NO, connection between the literary Holmes and the one in the movies.
I've seen both movies and enjoyed the crash-and-bang FX, along with the humorous characterizations. I also have read a bunch of A C Doyle's Holmes stories. I like the movies as long as I can keep telling myself that there's NO, repeat NO, connection between the literary Holmes and the one in the movies.
jliedeka Audioholic General Jan 6, 2012 #5 I liked it as well. I'm not really a fan of Guy Ritchie's style but I enjoyed the chemistry between Downey and Law. Jim
I liked it as well. I'm not really a fan of Guy Ritchie's style but I enjoyed the chemistry between Downey and Law. Jim
Sheep Audioholic Warlord Jan 6, 2012 #6 Both of these movies were a blast in theater, regardless of plot and story issues. I saw the second one in the new VIP theater at my local chain (cineplex). These included reclining leather seats, twist out leather trays and in seat food service including meals and alcoholic drinks. $19.50 a ticket, not including food or alcohol services. SheepStar
Both of these movies were a blast in theater, regardless of plot and story issues. I saw the second one in the new VIP theater at my local chain (cineplex). These included reclining leather seats, twist out leather trays and in seat food service including meals and alcoholic drinks. $19.50 a ticket, not including food or alcohol services. SheepStar
adk highlander Sith Lord Jan 6, 2012 #7 Going tonight after a few beers. I liked the first one so I'm looking forward to seeing it.
Adam Audioholic Jedi Jan 6, 2012 #8 adk highlander said: Going tonight after a few beers. Click to expand... Odds are I will be, too...
j_garcia Audioholic Jedi Jan 6, 2012 #9 Adam said: Odds are I will be, too... Click to expand... A date or stalking?
adk highlander Sith Lord Jan 6, 2012 #10 j_garcia said: A date or stalking? Click to expand... Stalking is dating for Adam.
Adam Audioholic Jedi Jan 6, 2012 #11 adk highlander said: Stalking is dating for Adam. Click to expand... So true, so true. Hey, on the upside, I don't have to buy her popcorn. Btw, I was talking about going to see a movie...
adk highlander said: Stalking is dating for Adam. Click to expand... So true, so true. Hey, on the upside, I don't have to buy her popcorn. Btw, I was talking about going to see a movie...
j_garcia Audioholic Jedi Jan 6, 2012 #12 Adam said: So true, so true. Hey, on the upside, I don't have to buy her popcorn. Click to expand... Good point. I hadn't thought about it that way. You'd actually be saving money.
Adam said: So true, so true. Hey, on the upside, I don't have to buy her popcorn. Click to expand... Good point. I hadn't thought about it that way. You'd actually be saving money.
H hizzaah Full Audioholic Jan 6, 2012 #13 Adam said: So true, so true. Hey, on the upside, I don't have to buy her popcorn. Click to expand... Genius.. I've been doing it all wrong the past few years! Just wait till I see her next..
Adam said: So true, so true. Hey, on the upside, I don't have to buy her popcorn. Click to expand... Genius.. I've been doing it all wrong the past few years! Just wait till I see her next..
M markw Audioholic Overlord Jan 6, 2012 #14 It's a fun movie. Just sit back, munch popcorn, and be prepared to be entertained. Nothing to take seriously or in which to find deep spiritual enlightenment. T Downey and Law play off of each other so well I think they are well positioned to be the new "Lethal Weapon" type of buddy movie franchise. Action, Interplay and wisecracks.
It's a fun movie. Just sit back, munch popcorn, and be prepared to be entertained. Nothing to take seriously or in which to find deep spiritual enlightenment. T Downey and Law play off of each other so well I think they are well positioned to be the new "Lethal Weapon" type of buddy movie franchise. Action, Interplay and wisecracks.
adk highlander Sith Lord Jan 9, 2012 #15 I liked it but I do think the first one was better. What bothered me was it just seemed like Guy Ritchie felt he had to take all his gimmicks (camera slo mo, etc.) to the the next level to keep it fresh but all it did was make it more frenetic and less cohesive of a movie.
I liked it but I do think the first one was better. What bothered me was it just seemed like Guy Ritchie felt he had to take all his gimmicks (camera slo mo, etc.) to the the next level to keep it fresh but all it did was make it more frenetic and less cohesive of a movie.
jonnythan Audioholic Ninja Jan 9, 2012 #16 j_garcia said: I enjoyed the first one, and I am a fan of many of Guy Ritchie's films, so I want to see this one as well. Click to expand... This one puts the first to shame. Improves on it in every way.
j_garcia said: I enjoyed the first one, and I am a fan of many of Guy Ritchie's films, so I want to see this one as well. Click to expand... This one puts the first to shame. Improves on it in every way.
j_garcia Audioholic Jedi Jun 18, 2012 #17 adk highlander said: I liked it but I do think the first one was better. What bothered me was it just seemed like Guy Ritchie felt he had to take all his gimmicks (camera slo mo, etc.) to the the next level to keep it fresh but all it did was make it more frenetic and less cohesive of a movie. Click to expand... Watched it last night. I agree, the story bounces around a bit, and doesn't hold together as well as the first, but I still had fun watching it.
adk highlander said: I liked it but I do think the first one was better. What bothered me was it just seemed like Guy Ritchie felt he had to take all his gimmicks (camera slo mo, etc.) to the the next level to keep it fresh but all it did was make it more frenetic and less cohesive of a movie. Click to expand... Watched it last night. I agree, the story bounces around a bit, and doesn't hold together as well as the first, but I still had fun watching it.
BoredSysAdmin Audioholic Slumlord Jun 18, 2012 #18 I loved what he did in "lock, stock" and snatch - the reverse event showing - I thought it was cool. Ala-Matrix slow mo is getting old and tired on me I did enjoy both movies, but yea - visual effects took a big chunk out of coherency of of script
I loved what he did in "lock, stock" and snatch - the reverse event showing - I thought it was cool. Ala-Matrix slow mo is getting old and tired on me I did enjoy both movies, but yea - visual effects took a big chunk out of coherency of of script
j_garcia Audioholic Jedi Jun 18, 2012 #19 The slo-mo is almost certainly for 3D effects. When watching in 2D, you aren't getting the full benefit of those moments, while in 3D you would not get as much effect if they weren't slowed down like that. So I get why they do it, but it does lose something in translation because it just seems like slo-mo for no reason.
The slo-mo is almost certainly for 3D effects. When watching in 2D, you aren't getting the full benefit of those moments, while in 3D you would not get as much effect if they weren't slowed down like that. So I get why they do it, but it does lose something in translation because it just seems like slo-mo for no reason.
3db Audioholic Slumlord Jun 19, 2012 #20 I have to crack this copy open which is now sitting on my shelf. I enjoyed this movie in the theater an I will enjoy it even more at home.
I have to crack this copy open which is now sitting on my shelf. I enjoyed this movie in the theater an I will enjoy it even more at home.
