|
|||||||||||||||
|
Weblog
Another reason to NEVER go to a theater last modified: Monday, April 03, 2006 (2:19:04 PM) I think I now know why some people consider “V” a good movie, its because the standards are so low. Now to be a “bad” movie, you have to be “Basic Instinct 2.” OK, last weekend I saw “Basic Instinct 2.” That was a mistake.
One of my best friends since High School called and said, “Let’s see a movie.” I wanted to see “Inside Man.” He wanted to see “Basic Instinct 2.” I said, “OK.” The problem with me: I think “Basic Instinct” is the best film ever created on sexual obsession, and I like the “ice-bitch, black-widow, all-controlling, super-hot, castrating female” character. The problem with the movie: 1. Sharon Stone is too old for this part. This movie gave her a “soccer mom” plus “ I can regain my youth through plastic surgery, old-floozy” look. This isn’t to say that I don’t think she isn’t an attractive lady in her late 40s, but that means she should be in parts like the older psychologist expert not the bought “sex-on-legs” woman. The movie would have been better if her character was trying to continue her existence from the first movie but was failing. If her need to be the “all-controlling ice-bitch” superceded her own actual control of others. 2. The most important character in this movie is the guy. Stone’s character gets to stay the same in the movie, but the man has to go from a pseudo-average guy to an insane individual. Michael Douglas played the role of edgy cop to obsessed nut-job very well in “Basic Instinct.” David Morrissey was not believable as this character. 3.The most unforgivable fault in this movie, the sex was not attractive. I felt like a little kid at a horror movie, “Oh no, they’re going to have sex, cover your eyes. Aaaaah!” In movies like “Election” and “Happiness” the sex is supposed to look bad, but these scenes looked even worse. “Basic Instinct” is a very well done movie. “Basic Instinct 2” is a reason to become celibate. Has anyone seen “Inside Man?” Is it any good?
saw inside man yesterday. It was good...but bland. There was no real peak in any action or story. And for being an hour and a half movie...It seemed like it took forever to get through >.
I recently saw Inside Man, also. I liked the couple of little twists in the movie, and I thought the ending was clever. But, I also thought it could be about 15-30 minutes shorter and been a more effective, more enjoyable movie. And, although I hate to say this since I''m a big fan of his, I, personally, did not like Denzel Washington in the lead role. I thought the role of the "aw shucks"-type of hero did not suit him at all because he has so much more presence than this role allowed him to show in the screen. Not sure if that makes any sense or not, but ... *sweatdrop* My hubby and I just saw 16 Blocks last night. We''re a bit late in seeing it, as we don''t normally get to go to movies ... but, I really liked it a lot. ^^
Uh ... pardon my bad grammar up there ... I''m having a brain fart today. *sigh* Of course, that sentence should be: "I also thought it could have been about 15-30 minutes shorter, and been a more effective, ..." Sheesh ... it''s really not easy being a dope! *runs off to hide*
Hey, how''d you even get in to see Basic Instinct 2 without a parent or guardian anyway?!? :OP
Mr. X, don’t tell me you liked “Basic Instinct 2.”
Nope. Don''t want to see it and don''t ever plan on seeing it. I only ever watched the first "Basic Instinct" one time many years ago. It was ok from what I remember. Go watch "Slither" instead. Slither is not a great movie but it''s a good movie. Cheesy good. Stick around after the credits to.
from what I know Basic Instinct 2 is up there with the likes of Zombie vs Mardi Gras, Batman & Robin and Freddy Got Fingered. |
|||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||
 |
|||||||||||||||
