Register  |  Sign In
View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Thu Jul 16, 2020 12:36 pm



Reply to topic  [ 42 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
 21 

What grade would you give this film?
A 4%  4%  [ 1 ]
B 57%  57%  [ 13 ]
C 26%  26%  [ 6 ]
D 4%  4%  [ 1 ]
F 9%  9%  [ 2 ]
Total votes : 23

 21 
Author Message
 
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 29, 2006 8:01 pm
Posts: 6380
Post 21
21

Image

Quote:
21 is a 2008 drama film directed by Australian director Robert Luketic and stars Jim Sturgess, Kevin Spacey, Laurence Fishburne, Kate Bosworth, Liza Lapira, Jacob Pitts, and Aaron Yoo. The film is inspired by the true story of the MIT Blackjack Team as told in Bringing Down the House, the best-selling book by Ben Mezrich. Despite its largely mixed reviews and controversy over the film's casting choices, 21 was a box office success, and was the number one film in the United States and Canada during its first and second weekends of release.

_________________
---!!---!!!!!!-11!!---!!---11---11!!!--!!--


Tue Mar 25, 2008 5:04 am
Profile WWW
What would Jesus *not* do?
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2007 12:55 am
Posts: 829
Location: Going Up the Down Escalator
Post Re: 21
I didn't hate this but I didn't really like either. I was more disapointed than anything else. There is little to no character developement and the gambling scenes are completely unrealistic. As is the editing together of frankenstein casinos that are in no way related to each other. You don't walk into the Hard Rock and play on Red Rock tables or have a view of the Bellagio fountains. The pacing of the film is slow and plodding which further hampens the film, if Luketic trimmed another 20 min or so then the film may have worked better. Also the film fails to explain why card counting is frowned upon (if done correctly it further reduces the house advantage and could flip it to the player, hence the casino loses money) and the old basement beatings went out in the early 1980's and are not part of the modern Vegas. Today casinos prosecute the shit out of your ass and are able to trash your credit as well as that of your friends and family as well, which is much worse than a simple beating. This film should've and could've been better.

Grade C/D

_________________
Top ten of 2008, Updated!

1. Slumdog Millionaire
2. Wall-E
3. Dark Knight
4. In Bruges
5. Tropic Thunder
6. Young @ Heart
7. Mongol
8. The Band's Visit
9. Visitor
10. Iron Man


Tue Mar 25, 2008 3:25 pm
Profile
What would Jesus *not* do?
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2007 12:55 am
Posts: 829
Location: Going Up the Down Escalator
Post Re: 21
Magnus wrote:
The Mr Pink wrote:
This film should've and could've been better.


Eh....I don't know what you were expecting after seeing the trailer. The film delivers on what the trailer promises.



I thought it failed to live up to what the horrible trailers were promoting. I could see that there was a good film in there somewhere amongst the mindless crap foist upon the screen its just too bad the mediocre script and poor directing got in the way. The only real positive experience I got from the film is that I was able to see it in Sony 4k digital projection which is just this side of actual film quality in terms of overall look.

_________________
Top ten of 2008, Updated!

1. Slumdog Millionaire
2. Wall-E
3. Dark Knight
4. In Bruges
5. Tropic Thunder
6. Young @ Heart
7. Mongol
8. The Band's Visit
9. Visitor
10. Iron Man


Thu Mar 27, 2008 12:50 am
Profile
He didn't look busy?!
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 3:59 pm
Posts: 4308
Post Re: 21
you say you didn't hate it and then you call it a "mindless crap foist." :huh:

_________________
Image
Retroviral Videos
A film-based project created for the purpose of helping raise awareness about HIV/AIDS, specifically in South Africa.


Thu Mar 27, 2008 4:55 pm
Profile WWW
What would Jesus *not* do?
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2007 12:55 am
Posts: 829
Location: Going Up the Down Escalator
Post Re: 21
billybobwashere wrote:
you say you didn't hate it and then you call it a "mindless crap foist." :huh:


There were enough 'good' elements in the film that kept me from hating it. A film can be full of mindless crap and still not warrant my hatred, there's just an ever so slightly fine line and this didn't cross it. I can't in good concious recommend this film to anyone but I won't tell anyone not to go see it.

_________________
Top ten of 2008, Updated!

1. Slumdog Millionaire
2. Wall-E
3. Dark Knight
4. In Bruges
5. Tropic Thunder
6. Young @ Heart
7. Mongol
8. The Band's Visit
9. Visitor
10. Iron Man


Thu Mar 27, 2008 7:00 pm
Profile
On autopilot for the summer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 10:14 pm
Posts: 20775
Location: Walking around somewhere
Post Re: 21
The Mr Pink wrote:
I didn't hate this but I didn't really like either. I was more disapointed than anything else. There is little to no character developement and the gambling scenes are completely unrealistic. As is the editing together of frankenstein casinos that are in no way related to each other. You don't walk into the Hard Rock and play on Red Rock tables or have a view of the Bellagio fountains. The pacing of the film is slow and plodding which further hampens the film, if Luketic trimmed another 20 min or so then the film may have worked better. Also the film fails to explain why card counting is frowned upon (if done correctly it further reduces the house advantage and could flip it to the player, hence the casino loses money) and the old basement beatings went out in the early 1980's and are not part of the modern Vegas. Today casinos prosecute the shit out of your ass and are able to trash your credit as well as that of your friends and family as well, which is much worse than a simple beating. This film should've and could've been better.

Grade C/D


How do you know? Your saying your upset counting cards wasn't explained. I think its pretty self explanatory that its a way to cheat money out of a Casino. Eh, I'm not getting at you, but almost every review of yours is almost the same thing now.

_________________
Image

Chippy wrote:
As always, fuck Thegun.


Chippy wrote:
I want to live vicariously through you, Thegun!


Thu Mar 27, 2008 10:10 pm
Profile
Speed Racer
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2008 4:02 pm
Posts: 151
Post Re: 21
Okay, I liked it, the only thing that kinda botherd me was there were a couple of unrelestic scenes

but overall I general liked it

B
Spoiler: show
The part that I thought that was unrelestic was when they the lead talked Mickey into doing another job, a teacher that is that intelegent should not be that stupid,,, you take 300k+ from the guy and the next day he wants to be friends come on


Fri Mar 28, 2008 4:23 am
Profile
On autopilot for the summer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 10:14 pm
Posts: 20775
Location: Walking around somewhere
Post Re: 21
Vanilla Sky wrote:
Okay, I liked it, the only thing that kinda botherd me was there were a couple of unrelestic scenes

but overall I general liked it

B
Spoiler: show
The part that I thought that was unrelestic was when they the lead talked Mickey into doing another job, a teacher that is that intelegent should not be that stupid,,, you take 300k+ from the guy and the next day he wants to be friends come on


I thought the beginning was dam boring filled with some terrible acting. I wanted to kill the Jack Black wannabe fat friend. One Spacey comes on the film becomes acceptable, but it picks up finally when they get to Vegas it becomes entertaining in the simple sense and is passable entertainment. It makes me wish they made a story about Spacey cleaning up Fisburne in the old days, that probably would have been an awesome movie. What's there I'll give a C+

_________________
Image

Chippy wrote:
As always, fuck Thegun.


Chippy wrote:
I want to live vicariously through you, Thegun!


Fri Mar 28, 2008 4:24 pm
Profile
What would Jesus *not* do?
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2007 12:55 am
Posts: 829
Location: Going Up the Down Escalator
Post Re: 21
Thegun wrote:
The Mr Pink wrote:
I didn't hate this but I didn't really like either. I was more disapointed than anything else. There is little to no character developement and the gambling scenes are completely unrealistic. As is the editing together of frankenstein casinos that are in no way related to each other. You don't walk into the Hard Rock and play on Red Rock tables or have a view of the Bellagio fountains. The pacing of the film is slow and plodding which further hampens the film, if Luketic trimmed another 20 min or so then the film may have worked better. Also the film fails to explain why card counting is frowned upon (if done correctly it further reduces the house advantage and could flip it to the player, hence the casino loses money) and the old basement beatings went out in the early 1980's and are not part of the modern Vegas. Today casinos prosecute the shit out of your ass and are able to trash your credit as well as that of your friends and family as well, which is much worse than a simple beating. This film should've and could've been better.

Grade C/D


How do you know? Your saying your upset counting cards wasn't explained. I think its pretty self explanatory that its a way to cheat money out of a Casino. Eh, I'm not getting at you, but almost every review of yours is almost the same thing now.



How do I know? I've lived my entire life in Vegas and I know plenty of hotel security gaurds to know. Once the mob was ran out of town and replaced by corporate cronies it simply became bad business to beat up dead beat customers. Corporate run casinos are in the business of taking your money, and they only lend their money to you if you can demonstrate to them you have a solid financial foundation. Sure some patrons are roughed up when they are caught cheating on the gaming floor, but thats mainly as a result of them resisting arrest. When someone takes a swing at security they have the right to defend themselves. But for the most part security is very respectful in the way they handle the unrully and the cheaters, as we live in a very litigous society.

As for the film I was just dissapointed with it. I wanted to like it more than I did so I probably set myself up for disapointment.

_________________
Top ten of 2008, Updated!

1. Slumdog Millionaire
2. Wall-E
3. Dark Knight
4. In Bruges
5. Tropic Thunder
6. Young @ Heart
7. Mongol
8. The Band's Visit
9. Visitor
10. Iron Man


Fri Mar 28, 2008 5:23 pm
Profile
A very honest-hearted fellow
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2004 8:02 pm
Posts: 4767
Post Re: 21
I found:
Spoiler: show
The part where his friends disown him and the next day he gambles away all the money, very strange and out of character and hard to figure out until the next scene where Spacey is yelling out the team.


I thought the movie was entertaining with a good technoish score. It is better than the critics give it credit for. C+.


Fri Mar 28, 2008 10:23 pm
Profile WWW
Orphan

Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2005 5:47 pm
Posts: 19747
Post Re: 21
The Mr Pink wrote:
Thegun wrote:
The Mr Pink wrote:
I didn't hate this but I didn't really like either. I was more disapointed than anything else. There is little to no character developement and the gambling scenes are completely unrealistic. As is the editing together of frankenstein casinos that are in no way related to each other. You don't walk into the Hard Rock and play on Red Rock tables or have a view of the Bellagio fountains. The pacing of the film is slow and plodding which further hampens the film, if Luketic trimmed another 20 min or so then the film may have worked better. Also the film fails to explain why card counting is frowned upon (if done correctly it further reduces the house advantage and could flip it to the player, hence the casino loses money) and the old basement beatings went out in the early 1980's and are not part of the modern Vegas. Today casinos prosecute the shit out of your ass and are able to trash your credit as well as that of your friends and family as well, which is much worse than a simple beating. This film should've and could've been better.

Grade C/D


How do you know? Your saying your upset counting cards wasn't explained. I think its pretty self explanatory that its a way to cheat money out of a Casino. Eh, I'm not getting at you, but almost every review of yours is almost the same thing now.



How do I know? I've lived my entire life in Vegas and I know plenty of hotel security gaurds to know. Once the mob was ran out of town and replaced by corporate cronies it simply became bad business to beat up dead beat customers. Corporate run casinos are in the business of taking your money, and they only lend their money to you if you can demonstrate to them you have a solid financial foundation. Sure some patrons are roughed up when they are caught cheating on the gaming floor, but thats mainly as a result of them resisting arrest. When someone takes a swing at security they have the right to defend themselves. But for the most part security is very respectful in the way they handle the unrully and the cheaters, as we live in a very litigous society.

As for the film I was just dissapointed with it. I wanted to like it more than I did so I probably set myself up for disapointment.


Know-it-all A-hole prick, party of one :disgust:


Fri Mar 28, 2008 11:36 pm
Profile
---------
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 10:42 pm
Posts: 11808
Location: Kansas City, Kansas
Post Re: 21
I liked it. The movie was pretty well-made considering what it was. The cast was generally good, the lead could have been a little more funnier. I didn't think that it was smart to keep going as the same identity everytime they went to Vegas, especially the same casinos. So at the end, they just happened to go to the casino that was the security guard's last account? Kind unlucky lol. Overall it had quite a few nice scenes that reminded me of Ocean's Eleven, the rest was OK.

Grade: B


Sat Mar 29, 2008 3:48 pm
Profile
2.71828183

Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2004 9:16 pm
Posts: 7827
Location: please delete me
Post Re: 21
The book and the History channel special on this subject were actually very good, if anyone is interested.

The trailer totally turned off since you can how much they really departed from the truth.


Sat Mar 29, 2008 4:20 pm
Profile
Extraordinary

Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 1:13 pm
Posts: 15197
Location: Planet Xatar
Post Re: 21
Ripper wrote:
The book and the History channel special on this subject were actually very good, if anyone is interested.

The trailer totally turned off since you can how much they really departed from the truth.

I also liked the History Channel doc on this - - I think I'm going to skip the movie version...


Sat Mar 29, 2008 4:23 pm
Profile
Sbil
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 3:38 pm
Posts: 48357
Location: Multi-tasking
Post Re: 21
I actually quite enjoyed it, more than I thought I would. It's rather familiar and has more than a few plot holes, but effective at the same time. Jim Sturgess is energetic and likeable in the lead role, coming across as far more appealing than he did in Across the Universe. Kevin Spacey brings his usual intensity to the proceedings, but Kate Bosworth fails to convince in a somewhat wooden performance. I had fun. B


Sat Mar 29, 2008 11:43 pm
Profile WWW
Forum General

Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2008 11:01 am
Posts: 8684
Post Re: 21
Libs wrote:
I actually quite enjoyed it, more than I thought I would. It's rather familiar and has more than a few plot holes, but effective at the same time. Jim Sturgess is energetic and likeable in the lead role, coming across as far more appealing than he did in Across the Universe. Kevin Spacey brings his usual intensity to the proceedings, but Kate Bosworth fails to convince in a somewhat wooden performance. I had fun. B


I agree with this except you didn't mention Laurence Fishburne who I could had done without and I would have liked this movie more if the whole fight had just been between Jim Sturgess and Kevin Spacey.


Sun Mar 30, 2008 12:11 am
Profile
On autopilot for the summer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 10:14 pm
Posts: 20775
Location: Walking around somewhere
Post Re: 21
MG Casey wrote:
I liked it. The movie was pretty well-made considering what it was. The cast was generally good, the lead could have been a little more funnier. I didn't think that it was smart to keep going as the same identity everytime they went to Vegas, especially the same casinos. So at the end, they just happened to go to the casino that was the security guard's last account? Kind unlucky lol. Overall it had quite a few nice scenes that reminded me of Ocean's Eleven, the rest was OK.

Grade: B


My only response to that was that it was explained that the new software was of face recognition was taking over, and they couldnt go to casinos that had it. So they had to go to the ones Fishburnes was in charge of, and thats why they kept saying the window of opportunity was dying out

_________________
Image

Chippy wrote:
As always, fuck Thegun.


Chippy wrote:
I want to live vicariously through you, Thegun!


Sun Mar 30, 2008 12:16 am
Profile
Forum General

Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2008 11:01 am
Posts: 8684
Post Re: 21
Thegun wrote:
MG Casey wrote:
I liked it. The movie was pretty well-made considering what it was. The cast was generally good, the lead could have been a little more funnier. I didn't think that it was smart to keep going as the same identity everytime they went to Vegas, especially the same casinos. So at the end, they just happened to go to the casino that was the security guard's last account? Kind unlucky lol. Overall it had quite a few nice scenes that reminded me of Ocean's Eleven, the rest was OK.

Grade: B


My only response to that was that it was explained that the new software was of face recognition was taking over, and they couldnt go to casinos that had it. So they had to go to the ones Fishburnes was in charge of, and thats why they kept saying the window of opportunity was dying out


Correct.

Also on that face recognition tech, I am not sure if it can get through dark glasses to get the full picture. Once I was talking to a friend and he mentioned that fact to me.


Sun Mar 30, 2008 12:20 am
Profile
Pure Phase
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 7:33 am
Posts: 34865
Location: Maryland
Post Re: 21
The definition of solid. The final result of a group of pros coming together to create a film which, while not a masterpiece, does its job - entertain the audience. Every actor fills their role - from the charismatic protagonist to the seductive love interest the slimy antagonist - well (Kevin Spacey, who also produced, is best as the smug villian - he's having a ball and it shows). The direction is crisp and stylish. The script has a satisfying number of twists and turns and colorful lines. And there's quality music (a remix of the seminal Rolling Stones hit "You Can't Always Get What You Want" is used to perfection). 21 won't blow your mind or receive any Academy Award nominations, but the hand it deals is entertaining - fast and fun. Which was enough for me to leave smiling.

B+

_________________
ImageImageImage

1. The Lost City of Z - 2. A Cure for Wellness - 3. Phantom Thread - 4. T2 Trainspotting - 5. Detroit - 6. Good Time - 7. The Beguiled - 8. The Florida Project - 9. Logan and 10. Molly's Game


Sun Mar 30, 2008 2:43 am
Profile
Rachel McAdams Fan
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2004 11:13 am
Posts: 13804
Location: New York, NY
Post Re: 21
The best way I can describe this movie is that it is massively entertaining. I seriously had a great time watching it and want to check it out again. It's stylish, glossy fun that is elevated by a strong cast. Jim Sturgess, who bothered me in Across The Universe, was great here - and Kevin Spacey stole every scene he was in. I also liked Kate Bosworth a lot here as well. It's overlong and the script has some issues, but this is pure escapist entertainment at its best. Go see it and have a good time. B+


Sun Mar 30, 2008 1:36 pm
Profile YIM WWW
The Lubitsch Touch
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 5:48 pm
Posts: 11019
Post Re: 21
I thought it was fookin' terrible. What else is there to say? I remember little at this point. And I defy anyone to give me so much as one bit of character background or information regarding the two Asian teammates, other than their ethnicity, math skills, and, in the case of the gentleman, possible homosexuality. Miserable movie.

Winner, winner, chicken dinner indeed.

_________________
k


Sun Mar 30, 2008 3:44 pm
Profile
2.71828183

Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2004 9:16 pm
Posts: 7827
Location: please delete me
Post Re: 21
yoshue wrote:
I thought it was fookin' terrible. What else is there to say? I remember little at this point. And I defy anyone to give me so much as one bit of character background or information regarding the two Asian teammates, other than their ethnicity, math skills, and, in the case of the gentleman, possible homosexuality. Miserable movie.

Winner, winner, chicken dinner indeed.


In reality the whole team was Asian American, but in Hollywood we need a cute white boy having sex with a cute girl, doesn't her that she got that girl next door look *yawn*


Sun Mar 30, 2008 4:58 pm
Profile
Forum General

Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2008 11:01 am
Posts: 8684
Post Re: 21
yoshue wrote:
I thought it was fookin' terrible. What else is there to say? I remember little at this point. And I defy anyone to give me so much as one bit of character background or information regarding the two Asian teammates, other than their ethnicity, math skills, and, in the case of the gentleman, possible homosexuality. Miserable movie.

Winner, winner, chicken dinner indeed.


The guy was a pretty thief and the girl acted like she wanted to get laid, is all I remember about them.

Anyway, in a story like this where you have 5 gangmembers, the boss and the security guard, do you have to detail everyone's background? They did enough of the important ones.

now, what is the count for Magazine, 17 and Sweet, 16.


Sun Mar 30, 2008 5:16 pm
Profile
---------
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 10:42 pm
Posts: 11808
Location: Kansas City, Kansas
Post Re: 21
Grill wrote:
Thegun wrote:
My only response to that was that it was explained that the new software was of face recognition was taking over, and they couldnt go to casinos that had it. So they had to go to the ones Fishburnes was in charge of, and thats why they kept saying the window of opportunity was dying out


Correct.

Also on that face recognition tech, I am not sure if it can get through dark glasses to get the full picture. Once I was talking to a friend and he mentioned that fact to me.

That's was I was thinking. No way that system is THAT advanced. A hat or sunglasses or even big hair could mess it up. Fake nose, easy.


Mon Mar 31, 2008 2:24 am
Profile
On autopilot for the summer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 10:14 pm
Posts: 20775
Location: Walking around somewhere
Post Re: 21
MG Casey wrote:
Grill wrote:
Thegun wrote:
My only response to that was that it was explained that the new software was of face recognition was taking over, and they couldnt go to casinos that had it. So they had to go to the ones Fishburnes was in charge of, and thats why they kept saying the window of opportunity was dying out


Correct.

Also on that face recognition tech, I am not sure if it can get through dark glasses to get the full picture. Once I was talking to a friend and he mentioned that fact to me.

That's was I was thinking. No way that system is THAT advanced. A hat or sunglasses or even big hair could mess it up. Fake nose, easy.


Absolutely, but for the film's purposes it was the end all to card counting in vegas.

_________________
Image

Chippy wrote:
As always, fuck Thegun.


Chippy wrote:
I want to live vicariously through you, Thegun!


Mon Mar 31, 2008 5:09 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 42 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware for PTF.