forasale
Joined Aug 2006
Welcome to the new profile
Our updates are still in development. While the previous version of the profile is no longer accessible, we're actively working on improvements, and some of the missing features will be returning soon! Stay tuned for their return. In the meantime, the Ratings Analysis is still available on our iOS and Android apps, found on the profile page. To view your Rating Distribution(s) by Year and Genre, please refer to our new Help guide.
Badges3
To learn how to earn badges, go to the badges help page.
Reviews4
forasale's rating
It's a solid action flick for sure - nothing terribly new, but it does good work with the WW2 formula that other war flicks have used before.
There is no one flaw I can point to in this film as my reason for giving it a 7, but quite honestly, the thought that stayed in my mind as I watched it was that this film while good, had the potential to be great.
It falls short. The acting and character development is intriguing, but lacks the depth of characters in films like Inglorious Basterds.
It has a fun story, but a little more detail could have may the commando training subplot as well as the rest of the movie so much more.
The beginning is great, but leaves many scenes to the imagination of the viewer. You almost have to wonder if the film was gutted in order to shorten the running time to its fairly short hour and a half.
Like I said, it's good - but it could have been great.
There is no one flaw I can point to in this film as my reason for giving it a 7, but quite honestly, the thought that stayed in my mind as I watched it was that this film while good, had the potential to be great.
It falls short. The acting and character development is intriguing, but lacks the depth of characters in films like Inglorious Basterds.
It has a fun story, but a little more detail could have may the commando training subplot as well as the rest of the movie so much more.
The beginning is great, but leaves many scenes to the imagination of the viewer. You almost have to wonder if the film was gutted in order to shorten the running time to its fairly short hour and a half.
Like I said, it's good - but it could have been great.
Just finished seeing the last showing here at Sundance, over a quarter of the audience walked out. Audio blares through the whole film in a way that leaves even the most patient film goer in pain. The film itself lacks much of a story. I have seen some disturbing and painful horror, but this is just plain ridiculous. It tries for the lost in woods feel of Blair Witch, but substitutes screams and flashed images for genuine scares.
Story wise, it seems like they were trying to do an Alice In Wonderland finds herself in hell. The lead role does an admirable job acting, but the juxtaposed story never really takes you anywhere. You will scratch your head after seeing this one, wondering what was the point? If the filmmakers were trying to troll sundance, I would say they succeeded.
Story wise, it seems like they were trying to do an Alice In Wonderland finds herself in hell. The lead role does an admirable job acting, but the juxtaposed story never really takes you anywhere. You will scratch your head after seeing this one, wondering what was the point? If the filmmakers were trying to troll sundance, I would say they succeeded.
This Saw is gorier, bloodier, and more extreme than the past two. It lacks a solid story however, and is honestly, just a gore film.
The ending is predictable, far more so than the previous two, and the Doctor's acting is shall we say...awful.
I'm not saying don't see it, just telling it like it is.
Most Saw fans will likely enjoy it, don't expect any traps that we haven't already seen in the trailers. There are few surprises.
The film is shot oddly, not quite as cleanly done as the previous, which is likely the result of a rush job. Don't look for too many positive reviews for this one. But then again, what exactly is one expecting going in to see Saw 3?
The ending is predictable, far more so than the previous two, and the Doctor's acting is shall we say...awful.
I'm not saying don't see it, just telling it like it is.
Most Saw fans will likely enjoy it, don't expect any traps that we haven't already seen in the trailers. There are few surprises.
The film is shot oddly, not quite as cleanly done as the previous, which is likely the result of a rush job. Don't look for too many positive reviews for this one. But then again, what exactly is one expecting going in to see Saw 3?