Shooter

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.



FlappingMangera
New sniper movie with Mark Wahlberg. Hasn't been a good sniper flick since enemy at the gates, nice to see this is looking good.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5FLJPVMxCXg

dave_kodak
I've seen the Trailer for it 5 times now, and i really dont feel its going to get great re-views, i know i shouldnt say that knowing i havent really read anything about the film. IMO.


but on the other hand i really havent seen Mark Wahlberg do a bad job at acting, and i also havent seen him be in a film i didnt like.

i wont get my hopes uo for this just like many other films, but i dont think im going to go out of my way to see it.


But it has been a while since i saw a good Double-crossed or Sniper film.

FlappingMangera
Yeah, Wahlberg's acting career has really been stepped up as of late. I loved him in The Departed. I think he should have gotten the best supporting actor oscar, he definitely stole all the scenes he was in

Dusty
Marky Mark being a badass.

Oh, and Danny Glover!

dave_kodak
Originally posted by Dusty
Marky Mark being a badass.

Oh, and Danny Glover! hahaha i forgot about marky mark...

ahh how i miss the old days...

ragesRemorse
looks like a typical fly by night action movie. It reminds me of a commando for the new generation

H. S. 6
Looks decent. I'll probably wind up renting it.

exanda kane
It doesn't look to good, but I think I might attempt a cinema visit or at very least DVD. As van Morrison once wrote, "I'm in a Mark Wahlberg state of mind".

DanZeke25
I just saw it. It was REALLY good. Better than I expected, and I expected it to be pretty damn good.

Ignite
i just saw this movie and...omg....it was the worst movie i have seen in a while and i don't get how any body can say they liked it.

beyond bad , beyond any logic what so ever.

i want my two hours back.

H. S. 6
Originally posted by Ignite
i just saw this movie and...omg....it was the worst movie i have seen in a while and i don't get how any body can say they liked it.

beyond bad , beyond any logic what so ever.

i want my two hours back.

What was bad about it?

The Hawk
Isnt it the sequal to The Marine.

Mark Wahlberg is a shitty actor. If you can even call him an actor. He's a cardboard cutout of himself in every movie.

Ignite
They tried to make it realistic the start with the wind speed at the barrel of the gun and that was fine, it was good.

But then it got so stupid with its unrealistic things that started to happen afterwards i lost interest , and the way too many explosions and far too many two men killing 50 men scenes i just started laughing.

exanda kane
Originally posted by The Hawk
Isnt it the sequal to The Marine.

Mark Wahlberg is a shitty actor. If you can even call him an actor. He's a cardboard cutout of himself in every movie.

I disagree.

=Tired Hiker=
Wahlberg was the bomb in The Departed, yo!

Rogue Jedi
my main problem with this movie is gonna be that i read the book first. from what i see, it is the same basic storyline, but with some unneeded changes made.

exanda kane
Very enjoyable film, dumb yes, but well made and enjoyable.

If I wanted realism I'd go and see a kitchen-sink drama. I suppose the same people who cited that they disliked this film as "unrealistic" would deem one of them boring.

Thorinn
I've seen this movie twice.

Very good, a lot of good action.

The Hawk
I love him in The Departed too.... I loved his fruity haircut, which totally didnt fit him and was obviously a pathetic attempt to not look the same, kinda like Matt Damon in The Talented Mr Ripley when he wore glasses, and I loved how he spent the entire freakin movie pissed off and just cussing and yellin at everybody. Thats was some great actin'


Geez, how can anybody think that douche is a good actor.

exanda kane
Your blaming a stylists choice for Wahlberg's bad acting?. Amusing.

The Hawk
LOl... How did you connect the two?


1. He's a bad actor, period.
And
2. His appearance in The Departed looked stupid.


My contention is that he's the same in all his movies and his performances arent that great. Here his performance was merely okay, but at times annoying and he looked like a retard.

Rogue Jedi
mark wahlberg was entirely the wrong choice for bob lee swagger. has anyone here ever read the book, "point of impact?" swagger is about 45 to 50 years old, a vietnam vet. a badass sniper, obviously. same basic storyline, just slightly different. nick memphis is in the book, as is most of the baddies.
bob lee swagger is described as a "blue collar rambo."

exanda kane
Originally posted by The Hawk
LOl... How did you connect the two?


1. He's a bad actor, period.
And
2. His appearance in The Departed looked stupid.


My contention is that he's the same in all his movies and his performances arent that great. Here his performance was merely okay, but at times annoying and he looked like a retard.

I'll make this assumed statement, much like your own; you make your points like a "retard", and no, I have no evidence to back that up whatsoever.
But, and this is the very interesting but, because of my misinformed views, much like your own, I am able to make absurd and outlandish statements with absolutedly no proof, just because I can.

Jog on kiddo.

manorastroman
Originally posted by The Hawk
Geez, how can anybody think that douche is a good actor.

you ever seen boogie nights? jog on, kiddo.

and how are you blaming wahlberg for the screenplay? his character ran around pissed off all the time, what'd you want him to do about it? have a teary oscar moment in the middle?

The Hawk
Originally posted by exanda kane
I'll make this assumed statement, much like your own; you make your points like a "retard", and no, I have no evidence to back that up whatsoever.
But, and this is the very interesting but, because of my misinformed views, much like your own, I am able to make absurd and outlandish statements with absolutedly no proof, just because I can.

Jog on kiddo.

Lol.... gimme a break, I cant back up my statements?
Here, my proof for his bad acting are his performances.
and my evidence for his retarded appearance was his retarded appearance.

If you think the look of a character isnt important, then we can stop even discussing movies now. How well do you think Al Pacinos Performance in the Godfather would have been if he had long girly hair. Shit would stick out like sore thumb.

Even Jack Nicholson... dude looked like he was just walking down the street in his normal life. I bet he was even wearing his own clothes..lol


Or do you notice any difference Mark W's performances.. all I see is the same two dimensional character every single time... oh cept for the Departed, he had long hair in that one ane yelled alot.

Good example. I changed my mind, he's a great actor, Now.


Im not blaming anything on anybody... his character was shitty and annoying, either he didnt do a good enough job winning me over, or the part sucked. either way it blew. And he looked like a retard...




Everybody's entitled to their opinions, so to each their own.
Im not raggin on anybody or saying Im right and somebody's wrong...

but just to let you understand how it feels to read threads like this...

It would be like seeing a thread about feces and watching everybody write about how good it smells and tastes. Mind bogglin.

exanda kane
Originally posted by The Hawk
Lol.... gimme a break, I cant back up my statements?
Here, my proof for his bad acting are his performances.
and my evidence for his retarded appearance was his retarded appearance.

If you think the look of a character isnt important, then we can stop even discussing movies now. How well do you think Al Pacinos Performance in the Godfather would have been if he had long girly hair. Shit would stick out like sore thumb.

Even Jack Nicholson... dude looked like he was just walking down the street in his normal life. I bet he was even wearing his own clothes..lol


Or do you notice any difference Mark W's performances.. all I see is the same two dimensional character every single time... oh cept for the Departed, he had long hair in that one ane yelled alot.

Good example. I changed my mind, he's a great actor, Now.


Im not blaming anything on anybody... his character was shitty and annoying, either he didnt do a good enough job winning me over, or the part sucked. either way it blew. And he looked like a retard...




Everybody's entitled to their opinions, so to each their own.
Im not raggin on anybody or saying Im right and somebody's wrong...

but just to let you understand how it feels to read threads like this...

It would be like seeing a thread about feces and watching everybody write about how good it smells and tastes. Mind bogglin.

As I said earlier, you simply have no evidence for your statements, and those you attempted to give there, are not examples of an informed opinion.

Rogue Jedi
i only saw like the first 15 minutes, then i had to leave on an emergency. did they have the part during his escape where he is in a river, clinging to a log, with a bamboo reed sticking out of the water for air?

The Hawk
Originally posted by exanda kane
As I said earlier, you simply have no evidence for your statements, and those you attempted to give there, are not examples of an informed opinion.

Yeah, you said a lot earlier... a whole lotta nothing.


What do you want me to do, give you examples of his bad performances? Try watching his movies.


do you think he can play parts that other good actors play? Could you imagine him in The Prestige? or The Machinest? lol... the fvck outta here. The guy you see in The Shooter is the same guy you see in the Italian Job and the same guy you see in The Big Hit..lol Only thing that changes is the lines.

manorastroman
do you consider al pacino or denzel washington to be good actors? because they both have that "same part, different lines" worse than anyone.

moreover, a restrained performance doesn't necessarily equal good acting.

exanda kane
Very cliche. Not very knowing.




Nice bunch of evidence there. Let's see. We got Boogie Nights, a nice performance, Three Kings, a nice performance again, looked scared as hell while listening to Micheal Jackson, as should be, then we got Planet of the Apes, he was solid, shame about the movie; moving on, we got Perfect Storm, solid, The Italian job, solid, Shooter, solid despite being in the gung ho hero role, and the Departed, entertaining and yet again, reliable.



Do I think he could play the parts Christian Bale could play?

Why, yes, I could. He wouldn't be as happy with loosing the weight to play Reznick, but that's not to say it isn't out of the question. Whatever your problem is with old Marky Mark, its misinformed; there is a reason why Darren Aronofsky has cast him as lead in his new film.



Yes, and Al Pacino has made it by, as mentioned, for the last 20 years on his Tony Montana performance (pouts, clenches fists and one tantrum per movie), Will Patton has played the negotiator in virtually every single role he has had, Morgan Freeman has gotten away with proverbial homocide as the wise old Black man living on the fringes of society, Jack Nicholson, Christopher Lee, Dom Monaghan, Sean Connery, Bruce Willis; Jesus, how many times has Samuel L. Jackson played the Jules role for gods sake?

With your logic, by default all these actors above are medicore performers and deserve no respect nor attention at all, which simply ain't the case kid. Think of all the magnificent films that actors of these calibre have been in and realise you gotta have some evidence to depose a actor of Wahlberg's integrity of his little throne.

Now, please stop using acronyms for laughing out loud, get back under your cretin-rock and rethink your outlandish beliefs.

The Hawk
Lol.... I think you just helped prove my point...

The only thing wrong with your analogy is that those characters you named all play the same roles in different movies, while Marky Mark is playing different characters and giving the same 2 dimensional performance in each role... I cant even remember his characters names after Im done watching the movie.



The guy can read lines, good for him... Oscar worthy? lol

And who you callin "kid"? ... get over yourself, mate. Thinking you know alot about movies, doesnt make you a wise old man.

exanda kane
Originally posted by The Hawk
The only thing wrong with your analogy is that those characters you named all play the same roles in different movies, while Marky Mark is playing different characters and giving the same 2 dimensional performance in each role... I cant even remember his characters names after Im done watching the movie.


I don't know whether you have been able to express yourself in words before, but it clearly isn't shown here. Your contradicting yourself at the very beginning, let alone the lack of coherence, the very point your arguing has evolved as you concede your points. If you can't remember his characters names after you've done watching the film, then that's a fault on your behalf.

Kids are point who start writing with the acronym lol. Jog on.

Ignite
This is so stupid , asking him to provide evidence about the reason why he cant act! its his opinion , thats the evidence. and what was your evidence about why you thought he could act? , that's not evidence thats your opinion!

Honestly! now each of your opinions is neither right nor wrong its just what you both think!! god!

Discos
One of the best movies I have seen this year,

Very entertaining and generally a good movie.

I don't see why people reviewed it as a bad movie, it isn't going to win any major awards but surely it entertained you to an extend?

Mark Wahlberg is becoming a very known name on the bigscreen nowadays, I think perhaps the roles in Perfect Storm & also Rock Star gave him a good push, but for me it was FOUR BROTHERS which sold him for me. Shit hot!

He is a very good actor in this movie, no doubt, doubt I could see anyone else do the role of the shooter... perhaps Matt Damon but this movie has already got too much resemblence to Bourne.

Discos - overall 9/10

exanda kane
Originally posted by Ignite
This is so stupid , asking him to provide evidence about the reason why he cant act! its his opinion , thats the evidence. and what was your evidence about why you thought he could act? , that's not evidence thats your opinion!

Honestly! now each of your opinions is neither right nor wrong its just what you both think!! god!

I mentioned he was solid in that film. That meant that he served his purpose in the film, acting as a support for the lead or as the lead serving the purpose of the narrative; it was a neutral statement, not an opinion. Those films would never have vaguely worked if we hadn't had a character the audience could relate too, and the majority of critical reviews and the box office proves that he works.

DanZeke25
Good or Bad Acting is based on opinion and opinion only. In my opinion Mark Wahlberg is a really good actor. In my opinion Shooter is a great action film. In my opinion if you were expecting something other than that, then you are retarded. In my opinion The Hawk is an idiot.

Ignite
The majority of people going along with something doesn't make it right , And if you look at all his "great" movie roles hes usually surrounded by a really good cast that carries the movie, George Clooney , Matt Damon, Leo, Jack, Charlize , and when he does movies as the lead , well you don't really remember those ones , they really aren't any good , and well thats just my opinion on that anyway.

Its votes and opinions that allow people to win and be nominated for Oscar's , and well , he hasn't won one has he?

It's obvious that you think Mark Walhberg is a good actor and so do a lot of other people , but there are also a lot of other people that don't and in the end it is just merely just an opinion , you can provide evidence to support your statement but you can't provide evidence to prove that you are correct.

You've got to take in consideration other peoples opinions , and whether you may or may not agree doesn't mean either parties are right or wrong.

K.Diddy
Originally posted by The Hawk


Mark Wahlberg is a shitty actor. If you can even call him an actor. He's a cardboard cutout of himself in every movie.

manorastroman
that's what made wahlberg stand out for me, departed-wise: he was surrounded by dicaprio, damon, nicholson, sheen, and baldwin, each of whom (with the exception of damon) were in very fine form. and yet wahlberg stood out, and even stole some scenes.

exanda kane
Originally posted by Ignite
The majority of people going along with something doesn't make it right , And if you look at all his "great" movie roles hes usually surrounded by a really good cast that carries the movie, George Clooney , Matt Damon, Leo, Jack, Charlize , and when he does movies as the lead , well you don't really remember those ones , they really aren't any good , and well thats just my opinion on that anyway.

Its votes and opinions that allow people to win and be nominated for Oscar's , and well , he hasn't won one has he?

It's obvious that you think Mark Walhberg is a good actor and so do a lot of other people , but there are also a lot of other people that don't and in the end it is just merely just an opinion , you can provide evidence to support your statement but you can't provide evidence to prove that you are correct.

You've got to take in consideration other peoples opinions , and whether you may or may not agree doesn't mean either parties are right or wrong.

As said before, Wahlberg serves his purpose in the film, whether as a lead or support, and this proves he can act. The films he is in prove that he can carry a story because of their critical acclaim and box office take, aside from all promotion and other factors. That is evidence of his success. The opinion comes from how good he is in that role. If you have an opinion that he is bad, then he is not a bad actor, those films worked, he worked for those films, and people enjoyed those films; but that he merely served the story, he did not take it further.

As said earlier, some of the greatest actors of all time tend to play a carbon copy of their most familiar role, so to say Wahlberg is "shitty" because of that is little more than ignorant. Plus, Wahlberg was nominated for an Oscar, and this proves his talent, even if he didn't win. Mr Hawk's comment that the style of Wahlberg's hair in The Departed was what made his perfomance "shitty". He should realise that the actor, and the stylist are different people.

I agree with this opinion, Wahlberg took the performance further than his lines. However, there is also evidence to prove that he worked for this film, in critical acclaim, box office intake (word of mouth) and his Oscar nomination.

Originally posted by manorastroman
that's what made wahlberg stand out for me, departed-wise: he was surrounded by dicaprio, damon, nicholson, sheen, and baldwin, each of whom (with the exception of damon) were in very fine form. and yet wahlberg stood out, and even stole some scenes.

Ignite
I don't even dislike mark walhberg , i think he's alright , i just don't know why people around here don't listen to anyone unless they agree with them , he's not a great actor, but he's ok.

and i never said he was shitty.

Rogue Jedi
he is average on a good day.

exanda kane
Originally posted by Ignite

and i never said he was shitty

I was quoting The Hawk, no more, no less.

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.