|
|
Post by Vits on May 14, 2017 17:35:04 GMT
A nameless drifter has to fight against an evil guy in a post-apocalyptic world while he learns to care about other people thanks to a woman he falls for and a youngster he mentors... but enough about WATERWORLD. This movie is about... well, the same thing. Actually, they both have the same actor, they both were made around the same time and they both received more attention from the Razzies than from ticket buyers. What makes this one different (aside from being longer (good God!)) is that this drifter pretends to be the world's last postman and brings people hope. You see, the U.S. Postal Service represents the foundation to re-build the governement and, eventually, society. Why wouldn't it? That would also be true in real life. Mail is the oldest form of communicating with people living in other societies and, since it doesn't have to be technological, it's the only form that's sure to exist until the end of time. I can imagine it. Through a piece of paper, presidents can agree to stop a war... and I'll be able to hold a troll's insult in my hands. Wait, what? Anyway, the evil guy's name is GENERAL BETHLEHEM. The evil guy in a movie about a Christ-like figure is named after the city Jesus was born in? Yeah... Don't expect a lot of subtlety. The very 1st shot felt like I had just walked in the middle of a montage. The opening credits made it look like a TV movie. Luckily, none of that was an indication of how the rest of the movie is. I mean, I didn't like it, but it's not an incompetent production that makes you say "What were they thinking?!" ------------------------------------- You can read the full review in my blog (in English, in Spanish or in Italian) and/or watch the video review: |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 14, 2017 18:06:54 GMT
Personally i never thought it was that bad.
|
|
|
|
Post by drystyx on May 14, 2017 18:08:16 GMT
It's one of the better "apocalyptic" movies, in the top 20% by any standards due to the characters being more credible than almost any of the others.
It looks bizarre on the surface, but it actually comes across with the most "credible characters in incredible circumstances" of such films, and "apocalyptic world" is definitely an incredible circumstance.
It lulls a bit for me, probably because they tried to make it a bit real. 7/10
|
|
|
|
Post by FridayOnElmStreet on May 14, 2017 18:17:31 GMT
3/10 Pretty forgettable.
|
|
|
|
Post by Primemovermithrax Pejorative on May 14, 2017 19:58:30 GMT
What I know about it is the Billy Crystal skit in the Oscars where he is sitting on the sinking Titanic and says: "I can't think of a bigger disaster"
and we hear a voice--saying: "No? Well I can!" And we see Costner hanging from the Titanic in a mailman costume--Crystal hands him the Oscar envelopes and Costner falls into the ocean.
|
|
|
|
Post by wmcclain on May 14, 2017 20:36:16 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on May 14, 2017 23:23:37 GMT
It's just very mediocre. It isn't the complete disaster it's made out to be.
|
|
|
|
Post by rateater on May 15, 2017 3:01:57 GMT
i love a good (bad) post apocalyptic film, especially a road warrior rip off, when done right. this wasn't exactly a road warrior ripoff, i think maybe they got the idea from equalizer 2000 where a nasty group of survivors hung out at a tiny post office. i did like it but it is 3 hours long and probably didn't have to be. i have to say i like the first 45 minutes or so and last half hour the best. tom petty shows up at the last half hour for the standoff and i love it. the first part is just kevin costner roaming around the wasteland with his horse and meeting people until the story starts kicking in, then you can take it or leave it.
|
|
|
|
Post by london777 on May 15, 2017 3:48:32 GMT
Why did they have to remake Il Postino (1994)? The original was fine.
|
|
|
|
Post by kingkoopa on May 15, 2017 4:22:17 GMT
I liked it. Kevin Costner gets too much crap. I think he's good at playing this kind of character...he and Mel Gibson (among others...like Viggo Mortensen and Tom Hardy) can pull off the post-apocalyptic mostly-silent, sometimes reluctant hero. It's far from what I'd call one of my favorite movies, but if you like this kind of thing, I'd say it's worth a watch. rateater pointed out one of the things that made me chuckle, which was the beginning...I kept wondering how he'd managed to keep a horse in this wasteland. It wasn't going to run out of things to eat, but it had little reason to trust Costner's character. It seemed unrealistically obedient. This happens to horses a lot in movies though, so I can't be too hard on it. |
|
