Originally Posted by Simply^Ride
Well he might not suck in his overall career, but in this movie the guy must of been on drugs or something. He just did a horrible job, he plays a straight married guy, but most of the movie he looks gay and confused (not trying to offend anyone, it's just my perspective).
When I gave the movie a 70% I overlooked the acting, I know it's not right but I did it just for the sake of the director. The beginning of the movie is solid and even the plot is interesting, someone could debate that the ending sucks, but i think it was just ok (he has done much better in the past).
But if I have to account for the acting in the rating, I would settle with a 50%. I believed this is the type of movie that can be broken or maid by the main actor (that's a stupid argument
), but anyway our friend Mark did a great job at destroying this picture
the movie actually has a mood similar to War of the Worlds, but it does not get nearly as good as that movie.
Your review sounds pretty spot on to me. MNS seems to always do a good job with the setup. Even Lady in the Water is alright. It's how it takes it from there. Seriously though all I could think of about this moview was "Day of the Tripids" or whatever that film was called, only worse.
On a side note, I saw the Incredible Hulk. Pretty good, but not nearly as great as Iron Man. Eric Bana did a much better Bruce Banner than Norton surprisingly. This movie is much better than the Ang Lee one, but man I didn't really feel like there was anything invested in Bruce Banner. I could have cared less if general Ross got his hands on him or not. They definitely missed on that front. Tim Roth was quite good as the villian and Marvel is setting things up nicely for the Avengers.