Is this good?
I remember the word-of-mouth being pretty bad, but the reviews were bad and they're apparently they're making a tv show...
>>70470024
reviews were good*
I haven't watched this piece of shit but it's still obvious that it was only praised by the lefty shill critics for political reasons. Want good reviews? Shove an empowered female into your shitfest.
See Fury Road and 10 Cloverfield Lane for other examples of this.
>>70470024
Yes it was good. Really solid action flick done by a gifted auteur director.
>>70470024
I saw it, it's pretty damn shitty.
You'll get nothing out of watching it, even the action is bad.
>>70470152
You are killing it with your insight today, exposing the truth in many a thread. Thank you, maybe it'll wake some of these sheeple up.
>>70470024
It's shit.
>>70470024
If you don't care about your lead sucking at acting I guess it's okay.
Gina is my forever waifu, I don't care how thick she gets.
It's a solid action film with a distinct visual flair. I don't get why /tv/irgins dislike it so mich. maybe it's because they feel constantly under threat whenever a protag is female
The way those names line up with the images triggers me.
>>70470152
What a generic fucking response this is. How much are you getting paid to shill rhetoric?
>>70470024
I loved it
It was fucking great, Soderbergh has a surprisingly strong sense for B-movie filmmaking. It's basically Bourne through a 60's spy-movie filter, the whole thing has a great sense of style and some flat-out excellent action.
Carano is pretty good too, she's got the right swagger for the role and they don't give her too much dialogue. Most of the performance is physical, so it works.
