My alarm went off when Ebert said it "provides a lot of comic relief".
Ebert... it IS a comedy. It's not an action movie with elements of comedy in it here and there. It is an action-comedy. There is so much comedy in True Lies that it isn't ABOUT the whole "terrorists plot". That's how I see it. You aren't really that excited about what happens then. It's a big action comedy adventure . The sub-romance with Simon/Carlos the Jackal is just as big part of the movie as everything else. It's central to the plot.
I don't get their review. I thought these guys were supposed to be the big, smart reviewers, but their review is bad.
I think these dumb fools think this is a movie that was supposed to be about Arnold fighting terrorists. I say that's one half the movie's content. The other half is the double life and Simon romance and all the other stuff (chemistry between Arnold and Tom).
The forced comedic elements of "True Lies" weren't that funny to begin with. It's easily the LEAST entertaining of all of James Cameron's films (including Piranha 2) . I think S&E were pretty damn spot-on. Deal with it.
And wow people are still bitching about movie reviews 14 years after the movie was released? Let go, son...
__________________ Fuck you and your whore asshole that Eddie Money wouldn't dare touch. - Solid Snake I wonder if I would turn invisible if I stick my finger up her ass. - Josh-da-man
But there's still HOKEYBLOG!!!
I, myself, think Bartholmule Pennipinch the Third's review of The Great Train Robbery was stupid and uneducated. His 1903 review stated that the audio was inaudible throughout the majority of the movie and that it was in black & white and shiz.
============================================ Bender: Oh... I think I have whiplash. Leela: You can't have whiplash. You don't have a neck. Bender: I meant Ass-Whiplash.
It was fun to watch Siskel and Ebert go head to head like junior high school kids, deciphering, breaking down movies pieces by pieces and totally missing the entire element which is enjoying the movie as a whole. I personally feel that movie critics takes movies way too seriously sometimes.
I think True Lies was a very enjoyable flick, and I had fun seeing the whole scene of Jamie Lee Curtis and the dude acting like a spy lol Plus I was blown away by her sexy body.
Yes I did find it humiliating on what they put her through, but it was hilarious.
The devil is a muthafuckin' liar, so you know I ain't worried, beeyotch! - (Reverend X)
So to all those being jerkoffs to the OP: what exactly is the statute of limitations on complaining about something? I'm sure he didn't watch it back in '94 or whenever it was the movie came out and hold a grudge all this time like some of you insinuate, I figure he just now stumbled upon that review, not everyone sees everything right when it comes out you know. If I watch Citizen Kane tomorrow would I not be allowed to complain about it if I don't like it since it came out so long ago? And who gives a shit if one of the guys bought it and the other isn't far behind, it's not like Parcher is complaining about the review to the guy's surviving family members.
To no one's surprise there are very few posts here that actually address the issue.
I watched True Lies the other day, and still today - as many years ago - find it a very enjoyable action comedy.I enjoyed getting it refreshed in my memory, and so went to check youtube if there was anything interesting on it,
I think it is utterly idiotic to say the movie has "comedy relief" since - I believe - that implies it's an action movie with comedy elements. It's not. It's an action comedy! There is so much comedy in this movie. There isn't ONE serious scene in this movie that doesn't contain some element or tone of comedy. Every action scene has some ridiculous element, funny punch lines, goofy action moves, etc.
As a reviewer I wouldn't bring down a movie just because I personally didn't like it that much when I can see it was still a well made movie that ""objectively"" contains a bunch of good elements and structures. Personally I think True Lies is WAY more than well made, and I think Cameron is one of the finest mainstream moviemakers and one of the biggest names in films ever
If you didn't like the Simon-Helen romance part then you didn't like True Lies, because that WAS the movie,along with the terrorists aspect.
It's no surprise the first thing Ebert mentions is the "action". Really it should be the action as well as the comedy.
Frankly I am sick of people - be it 20, 10 or 2 years or 2 days ago who direct unwarranted criticism towards movies they themselves could NEVER piece together. No chance in hell Siskel or Ebert are/were as visionary as Cameron, no chance they could ever make a movie as good as True Lies, and I think their review should recognize this. Yes it's their job to review, but review it fairly. They certainly missed the point on this one.
Whether they are living or dead doesn't change they missed the point, and you know comedy is a very individual thing in the sense that not everyone has the same taste and people are going to find different things funny. If you didn't like joke #1 in True Lies you probably didn't like joke #2, 3 or 4.