Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Wow... That was Not a good movie. And you know it's gotta be bad when *I* think it's bad because I tend to like everything.

 AduroT wrote:
Wow... That was Not a good movie. And you know it's gotta be bad when *I* think it's bad because I tend to like everything.

It was a 100 million dollar birthday present from Will Smith to his son directed by Shyamalan and produced almost exclusively by members of the Smith clan... Exactly what part of that premise screams anything other than absolute cinematographic disaster to you?

PhantomViper wrote:

 AduroT wrote:
Wow... That was Not a good movie. And you know it's gotta be bad when *I* think it's bad because I tend to like everything.

It was a 100 million dollar birthday present from Will Smith to his son directed by Shyamalan and produced almost exclusively by members of the Smith clan... Exactly what part of that premise screams anything other than absolute cinematographic disaster to you?

I didn't see anything about Scientology being involved so there's that, I guess.

 Breotan wrote:

PhantomViper wrote:

 AduroT wrote:
Wow... That was Not a good movie. And you know it's gotta be bad when *I* think it's bad because I tend to like everything.

It was a 100 million dollar birthday present from Will Smith to his son directed by Shyamalan and produced almost exclusively by members of the Smith clan... Exactly what part of that premise screams anything other than absolute cinematographic disaster to you?

I didn't see anything about Scientology being involved so there's that, I guess.

Actually, from what I read of the reviews after I watched it, a lot of it is exposing Scientology tenets. I did not know that when I was watching it though because I did not know what those tenets are. All I knew before I watched it was it was a scifi movie with Will Smith, and Will Smith tends to do good movies, so I watched it. I kind of assumed the son was his son, but since his son has had decent rolls before I didn't immediately assume that was a bad thing either. I didn't even know it was a Shamalyanaman movie until I saw his name in the credits. There was no Twist!

PhantomViper wrote:
It was a 100 million dollar birthday present from Will Smith to his son directed by Shyamalan and produced almost exclusively by members of the Smith clan... Exactly what part of that premise screams anything other than absolute cinematographic disaster to you?

I haven't seen it because that was precisely my read on it too, a Smith vanity project to try and launch his son's career, while the son does that stupid thing with his eyebrows like he's trying to be a Black Roger Moore.

Ron Hubbard stole a lot of good ideas inclusing secular philosophies to blend into Scientology to give it a veneer of logic.

It is therefore possible to speak a lot of sense and inadvertently echo Scientology without being Scientologists.

Will Smith and family have denied being Scientologists.

I watched the Half in the Bag episode covering this. That'll do for me.

As someone who has sometimes enjoyed Will Smith's films, there was literally not a single thing I saw in the trailer that made this film look appealing. I am pleased but unsurprised to see this was an accurate assessment.

 Ouze wrote:
As someone who has sometimes enjoyed Will Smith's films, there was literally not a single thing I saw in the trailer that made this film look appealing. I am pleased but unsurprised to see this was an accurate assessment.

Ditto (apart from the bit about enjoying Will Smith Films ).

The only thing the trailer did for me was let me know how much I didn't want to waste any money on it whatsoever.

See, I usually like even the bad Scifi films.I saw the poster/trailer for it and Wanted to see it. The only indication I had thought of before seeing it that it might be bad was that I had heard nothing about it. It was just kind of out and then nothing.

Will and Jaden Smith: Physicists and (new) Mathematicians

Rule of Thumb for Will Smith movies: avoid them like the plague.

 Sigvatr wrote:
Rule of Thumb for Will Smith movies: avoid them like the plague.

I liked every single one of them (yes, even WWW), up until After Earth (but it can be argued that After Earth isn't a Will Smith movie since he actually doesn't do anything in it).

PhantomViper wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
Rule of Thumb for Will Smith movies: avoid them like the plague.

I liked every single one of them (yes, even WWW), up until After Earth (but it can be argued that After Earth isn't a Will Smith movie since he actually doesn't do anything in it).

That is a very accurate description of his acting for this movie.

PhantomViper wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
Rule of Thumb for Will Smith movies: avoid them like the plague.

I liked every single one of them (yes, even WWW), up until After Earth (but it can be argued that After Earth isn't a Will Smith movie since he actually doesn't do anything in it).

I agree. WWW was...very meh, but his older movies weren't that bad. MiB was good. The problem is him becoming a dad, now dragging his son in each and every movie of his...which sucks.

 Sigvatr wrote:

PhantomViper wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
Rule of Thumb for Will Smith movies: avoid them like the plague.

I liked every single one of them (yes, even WWW), up until After Earth (but it can be argued that After Earth isn't a Will Smith movie since he actually doesn't do anything in it).

I agree. WWW was...very meh, but his older movies weren't that bad. MiB was good. The problem is him becoming a dad, now dragging his son in each and every movie of his...which sucks.

well he's been a dad for a while, I dont think his kid was vat borne and grew up in a weekend
the problem is he's realized he wants his son who has no talent to move out of his house some day, I think

For some reason I thought this thread was about Titan A.E., I leave this thread disappointed.

One thing i HATE with a passion is when parents try to buy success for their kids. Listen, just because you can act doesnt mean your kids can, it is a talent. Same with singing. When your daughters first released single is about haters, you know it isnt a good idea.
And Will Smith has always had this arrogance about him which i hate.

I like Will Smith, but after I saw the trailer I figured that was all of the movie I needed to see. I'll add it to the DVR when it makes it to HBO, but not expecting much..

 Jayce_The_Ace wrote:

 Ouze wrote:
As someone who has sometimes enjoyed Will Smith's films, there was literally not a single thing I saw in the trailer that made this film look appealing. I am pleased but unsurprised to see this was an accurate assessment.

Ditto (apart from the bit about enjoying Will Smith Films ).

The only thing the trailer did for me was let me know how much I didn't want to waste any money on it whatsoever.

Come on, you guys didn't like Independance Day? He punched an alien in the face - what more do you people want?

Decent plot that isnt a vanity project?

 Ahtman wrote:
Will and Jaden Smith: Physicists and (new) Mathematicians

I didn't realize he was flying rodent gak crazy.

*Sadface*

I liked the first 2 Men in Black movies, the conspiracy movie with Gene Hackman, and the one where he wants to be an intern for some financial institution and sells these scanner/x-ray thingies and is homeless and stuff. That movie was good.

Pursuit of Happyness. That was pretty good, yeah.

Also, Men in Black 1, good mention.

What was the Gene Hackman one?

This movie, for me, confirmed Will Smith's son can't act. I liked the sword thingy though.

 AduroT wrote:
What was the Gene Hackman one?

Enemy of the State, a movie thats more relevant today then it was back in 1998.

Fun Fact : GW product can be seen in Will Smiths sons room or something in this movie. A Leman Russ Battle Tank box or some such. I think...

Edit : NVM, his in movie son has a White Dwarf.

I like Will Smith, he was/is a decent musician a half decent clean comedian and a decent actor, though his versatility of role is very limited he makes up for that by being entertaining in what he can do.

It was Will Smith who arranged the 'rap summit' after Tupac and Biggie Smalls were killed and he makes a point of not going down the 'gangsta' route.

Besides Men In Black series was excellent and Will Smith did his part well.

Will Smith has some acting chops, all the way back to Six Degrees of Seperation. And he has a pretty good strike rate, if you know to avoid that one particular kind of blockbuster he does - the ones that are sold as Will Smith doing his crazy black guy schtick, which are always released along with a Will Smith pop song (Men In Black was pretty good, but got hollywood to think they could just bank on that formula over and over again without actually worrying about making a decent movie). Even in stuff like I Am Legend, which had real problems with the last act, his performance made the rest of the film pretty enjoyable.

And his efforts in more dramatic stuff, like Seven Pounds and The Pursuit of Happyness show the guy has actual range, even if the movies were more that a little bit too much oscar bait.

So I really don't think it's fair or sensible to just avoid movies because Will Smith is in them (other than the post-MiB zany blockbusters also with a pop song stuff).


But After Earth looked really, utterly terrible. Not just because famous people starring in movies alongside their kids is pretty much doomed. It just looked like people on blue screen fighting pretend monsters, and that's just really uninteresting.

 NELS1031 wrote:

 AduroT wrote:
What was the Gene Hackman one?

Enemy of the State,

That's the one. Good movie.

Another comment on After Earth. It's billed as the creatures on Earth have all evolved into super human killing machines and we could never survive there. The animals that we saw were a group of fairly normal looking baboons that were evaded by jumping in a river. A pack of large cats that looked Smaller than current day tigers and attempted to ignore the human in favor of baby birds. Some normal looking wild pigs that paid no attention to the human. A vulture with a good 10'+ wingspan that did snatch up a human and apparently attempt to feed him to its babies, but did not kill him first. The most lethal thing shown on earth was a poisonous leach like slug thing that caused blindness and paralysis very quickly. What we saw looked tamer than modern day Australia.