man, i didn't hate it but 10/10 is nutso. the bad acting has been well documented. there were some corny setups, clint rolls up on group of guys harassing the couple was karate kid-esque. f*cking banana peels in the clown's path. "He's a bigot but he's got a big heart and he's learning..." after school special themed poopla. you know, whatever, i like popcorn sh*t too but 10/10?
The acting outside of Clint sucked, I believe it's because Clint wanted people who weren't actors to make it more realistic/save a little $.
Very cheesy at times, like rolling up on thugs left and right with his old ass. The whole grumpy, racist old man suddenly making a magical transformation almost overnight is so corny. And the dialogue at times was like listening to nails on a chalkboard.
Last edited by depletedW : 06-19-2009 at 01:49 PM.
It was basically Unforgiven, only a little less good in every aspect, except the aspects of acting and screenwriting, which were drastically less good.
It was, however, an hilarious gift to Clint fans. The racial invectives he hurles throughout were enough to put it somewhere on my top 30 list.
It had some hints of greatness, like the end when he locks the kid in the basement and the screen he uses to lock him in there looks like the screen in a confessional. But overall? Come on, the movie was great if Snakes on a Plane was a fine film. GT was Snakes on a Plane plus Unforgiven, with the same aspirations and failures as Crash.
yeah it was good, indulgent clint eastwood fare, i enjoyed it greatly. i would however like to know exactly how he managed to find two actors that bad. he must have scowered the entire globe. they may have been first timers but still we are talking about 1 and 2 on the list of all time worst performances. those 2 actually made paris hilton look competent.