I've noticed that a lot of films have a wide gulf between how critics felt about it and how the general public felt about it. That alone speaks volumes.

Sauron,

Love you Man.

I saw it on Saturday. It wasn't bad. I was thinking of 1990's "Navy SEALs" and it was definitely less tacky than that. I agree that it is a movie that pretends to be different--the missions and storyline was kind of hohum but still entertaining to watch. It was neat that they used active duty Navy SEALs but I couldn't help thinking "Does this compromise them?" I don't know if it was the Coronas I was drinking while watching it but I was having some outside of the box thoughts such as "They are HALO jumping into Costa Rica---doesn't this imply that the US are invading a country and isn't that an act of war?"

There was some Hollywood aspect to it too. Maybe I'm wrong but if SEALs were in night stealth ops, I don't think they'd be using laser sights--with the dust and the bright light of the laser, I would think that would not only give away there position, but point out exactly where they were when you follow the laser back. I think that if they were using lasers, it would be the kind that you can only see with NVGs..but that's just what I think. Someone mentioned earlier about not seeing the reticule in the first person views. Well, the glass in the reticule is prismatic, so at certain angles you don't see it. The first person views were not down the boresight of the sight. The sight and weapon were kind of off to the left of the screen (imagine the camera mounted on their left shoulder) so you wouldn't see it anyway. Would've been cool though.

And yes I am annoyed with all the excessive optics on things like a the view through a standard pair of binolulars that are in movies. It ranks up there with how every fighter jet in the movies these days HAS to be in afterburner CONTINUOUSLY.

Not quite sure what the role of their senior chief was either...was he really working for the CIA or what? I don't think they hyped that tedious nature of the HALO jump either--to the layman it looked like any other jump.

But like I said, it was entertaining...

v6,
boNes

So...if 85% of the RT crowd liked it...I'm confused!




The Jedi Master

lol at 'the critic'

Lol I like your sig Bones

I thought that meant the public gave it an average score of 85%, otherwise wouldn't work - 85 + 31...

Mace,

Haha thanks. True story!

v6,
boNes

You are correct. The number refers to the average rating the movie got from the public. It's NOT the percentage of people who liked the movie.

So the critic and public numbers are done totally differently? The critic number says 31% of reviewers liked it, not that the average review is 31%, while the public number says the average review is 85%, but not that 85% liked it??

That doesn't make any sense.




The Jedi Master