Skip to main content

Legion: Angels vs Automatic Weapons - Guess Which Wins?

Image
By

Who screams for ice cream? I DO!!


The trailer looked interesting, I'll give it that. The premise made me shake my head though. God decides humanity has to go. Only 6 people with a trunk full of automatic weapons stand against the full might of the Almighty.

So they're cinders at the end, right? Nope. Nooo, nooo nooo. No sir. Not at all.

As it turns out, angels are pretty vulnerable to bullets. And most of all, headlocks! Seriously, you can darn near kill an angel with a headlock! True story film bro!

So. God has had it with Man. That God you heard about who destroyed cities with angels? Well, apparently God is all out of those guys. Michael the Arch Angel has decided he doesn't care for God's new plan of action. He falls to earth, cuts off his wings, grabs a ton of guns and heads out on the road.

Out in the middle nowhere, with a dollop of desert scenery, six decent actors humans with completely boring stories, flaws, and unexplainable motives are in a diner. One of them is pregnant.

How? You never find out. Why? You never find out. Another ("Jeep", Lucas Black) follows the pregnant one ("Charlie", Adrianne Palicki) like a lost puppy dog. Why? Visions, apparently.

In what must be one of the worst "C'mon, doing this for the paycheck, remember, doing this for the paycheck" career moves Dennis Quaid ("Bob Hanson") has ever made (and he's made some bad ones, so this took some doing), Quaid is forced to play one of the most hackneyed dim-witted country-folk cliches you've ever seen. Nice guy, but every time he moves on screen, says anything - you just shudder.

Charles S. Dutton ("Percy Walker") plays a very under-utilized role as the diner's cook. A noble, caring soul who never seems to have any explanation for any of his motives, actions or dialog.

Paul Bettany play perhaps the most aesthetic, thin-figured version of the Arch Angel Michael ever seen on this earth. Another good actor with terrible, terrible dialog, motivations... Well, everything, really. Much like all the other decent actors, all of the blame lies in the director's staggeringly incompetent hands.

Seriously - from what you hear of the Arch Angel Michael, you get the impression that he invented ass-kicking. If you could imagine someone that'd put Rambo and any role ever played by Schwarzenegger to shame, you'd be blinking at Bettany as he goes through the motions onscreen.

All the other angels don't have names (cannon fodder, of course), save Gabriel, who is played by Kevin Durand with hit-and-miss acting that's almost entirely composed of 'miss'. He wields the most amazing Ginzu Dewalt Swiss Army mace you've ever seen. Seriously, every time you think you've seen the most ridiculous thing it could possibly do, it tops it.

They battle hordes of humans possessed by angels (no, really) in your standard cliched zombie / horror movie style, and only Gabriel gives them a hard time. But he's incredibly vulnerable to headlocks as it turns out, so at the end, all is well.

AND YOU DON'T KNOW HOW OR WHY ANY OF THIS HAPPENED!

So. so, so, so bad.



Summary: Nice visual effects. Good actors. Good scares. Terrible, terrible, terrible, terrible, terrible, terrible, terrible, terrible, terrible, terrible, terrible, terrible, terrible, plot, story, directing, dialog... Everything else - just terrible.

This is the movie Uwe Boll turned down. UWE BOLL. The worst director in existence! Well, he has some serious competition now.

Don't pay to see this. Please.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Max Payne: The Movie - A Review

By
It all started innocently enough back in '01. Some company named 'Rockstar' put out a video game. It was like playing a cross between the best cliches of pulp detective novels and a combat system right out of the Matrix films. Some crazy fool turned it into a movie, and after seeing it tonight, I came to a few conclusions. One, the first video game was better than this movie. Two, this movie was still better than the second video game in the Max Payne series. Three, a few punches can put Max Payne in a hospital bed, but he can laugh off a shotgun blast to the chest from three feet away. If you're reading this, all you care about is 'should I bother seeing it or not?'. The short answer is, if you like stuff being shot up reaaaal good, go see it! If you're interested only in seeing Oscar-worthy movies, you'll probably want to skip this one. And for those of you sticking around for my humorous take on the movie... Max Payne is a man with a past. We know thi...
5 comments
Read more

Green Lantern: Made of Fail

By
If someone gave you $300 million dollars and said " Make me an awesome movie about the Green Lantern ", you might think to yourself 'Ah, twice as much money as Thor and X-Men: First Class had - easy as pie!'. If you're director Martin Campbell and you've impressed everyone with movies like Edge of Darkness and Casino Royale, but secretly hate super hero movies and Hollywood producers with an insane cunning, and really want to make an expensive pile of fail, you'd have made " Green Lantern ". The short review - don't waste your money on this unless you *literally* have nothing better to do than watch paint dry. If you like comic books, or even just action movies, AVOID AT ALL COSTS. Where to begin... I heard bad things about the movie, but I thought 'How bad could it be?'. First things first. Ryan Reynolds. Generally known for playing slightly air-headed characters with a sense of humor and formulaic Hollywood looks. Star of fifty-two ...
4 comments
Read more

The Hunger Games: A movie review

By
If I was to describe the hunger games in a single word, yes I know this is becoming a habit with me, it would be this:  Stark.  Having read the entire hunger games trilogy, I feel that this is appropriate, but does not necessarily make for the best movie.  Let me clarify though:  the very austere and even severe impression that I get from the movie isn't bad, it just isn't fun.  Interesting, compelling, provocative yes, but fun, no. A brief word to those that are fans of the series:  the movie is fine.  Structurally there isn't anything wrong with it and all the most critical details are left intact, as they had damn well better be if these people hope to make a trilogy out of this.  Being a fan of the series myself and having read all the books, I notice the glaring differences where small or large details have been left out and while I'm not thrilled, it didn't prove to be a deal breaker either.  On the whole, I would say...
4 comments
Read more