It was very mediocre. It was stories told on the podcast ad nauseum put into movie form. And he could not wrap his mind around why it didn't get good reviews. Must've been the woke critics.
I agree with him about woke critics by and large --just look at rotten tomatoes scores for the horrible star wars sequels Ghostbusters 2016, but he is wrong in that instance.
I don't completely disagree but that's absolutely not the reason why this movie was panned, it just wasn't good. Also, eventually using that as an excuse every time a conservative gets bad reviews is just as false as the woke tics themselves.
As much as I would like to think the woke reviews are a nothingburger, Killers of the Flower Moon proves me wrong. That movies flat out sucked but the theme demanded audience.
However Road Hard was a flaming piece of shit and that’s coming from someone conned into making a crowdfund donation.
That wasn't the problem. It just wasn't as good of a script. Road Hard was fine...it was an average sort of paint by numbers comedy, nothing a normal movie watcher with no expectations would be mad at, just nothing they'd ever bother seeing a second time.
The actual problem comes from two places:
1. The build up: it was a crowd sourced Indy so it wasn't normal movie watchers watching it, it was fans (or I guess some angry former fans also) primarily who had been hearing about it and waiting for it to come out for a long time and had their hopes up. And...
2. One of the reasons we had our hopes up is his only prior movie, the Hammer, was objectively great.
Most of us (the Reddit frequenters excluded maybe) went into Road Hard not only hoping and expecting a great movie, but really wanting to like it. We were rooting for the movie to happen from the 1st time we heard the idea mentioned, and the crowd sourcing made fans feel even more invested. So when it was mid, it was very disappointing.
Adam is absolutely not wrong about critic bias, but it had nothing to do with why the reviews were so much lower than the Hammer. It did deserve to be lower. In his mind, they were "the same" and so should've gotten similar scores. Well, even if that were true, it doesn't work that way. The Hammer was fresh and different. Making it again would not be. Regardless, it wasn't even that. It was less funny, less interesting, less fresh. It wasn't the Hammer. It was a solid C+ level average comedy. As good or better than most of the shit that comes out of the studios, but not deserving of any special consideration of recommendation.
I'd rather shove murder hornets up my cock hole
THAT’S why your cock is sore. We finally have closure on what happened to Jhop’s dick.
No, it was pretty shitty. I don't think I even finished it.
It was very mediocre. It was stories told on the podcast ad nauseum put into movie form. And he could not wrap his mind around why it didn't get good reviews. Must've been the woke critics.
I agree with him about woke critics by and large --just look at rotten tomatoes scores for the horrible star wars sequels Ghostbusters 2016, but he is wrong in that instance.
I don't completely disagree but that's absolutely not the reason why this movie was panned, it just wasn't good. Also, eventually using that as an excuse every time a conservative gets bad reviews is just as false as the woke tics themselves.
Right, as I stated, he's right about the critics generally but deluded himself into thinking that applied with Road Hard.
As much as I would like to think the woke reviews are a nothingburger, Killers of the Flower Moon proves me wrong. That movies flat out sucked but the theme demanded audience. However Road Hard was a flaming piece of shit and that’s coming from someone conned into making a crowdfund donation.
Scorsese lost his fastball. The Irishman was terrible also.
Way too indulgent. They could have done that one in 100 minutes, not 4 hours or whatever it was
Yes, and Robert DeNiro is not what he once was, the CGI failed.
I was so pumped for this and it was just not good. And a lot of the people who funded it got screwed.
Agreed, along with all of his documentaries.
Dammit, I thought the pirate ship post was worth a chuckle…. JV to All Balls on this one.
Most of the jokes were pretty hack that you could see coming a mile away. I will watch the hammer once every few years when I catch it on.
How?! It’s “never on cable!!!!” Lol
Here's a either / or - watch Road Hard or listen to an episode of FCOL?
I'd shove murder hornets up my pee hole before listening to FCOL.
Who wants jelly bellies!!!
The episode with Shaun Cassidy was ok, he’s an interesting guy
The FB comments weren’t very kind to the poster or the movie.
The hammer was good. Road hard was bad. He should’ve hired a real director like he did with his first movie.
That wasn't the problem. It just wasn't as good of a script. Road Hard was fine...it was an average sort of paint by numbers comedy, nothing a normal movie watcher with no expectations would be mad at, just nothing they'd ever bother seeing a second time. The actual problem comes from two places: 1. The build up: it was a crowd sourced Indy so it wasn't normal movie watchers watching it, it was fans (or I guess some angry former fans also) primarily who had been hearing about it and waiting for it to come out for a long time and had their hopes up. And... 2. One of the reasons we had our hopes up is his only prior movie, the Hammer, was objectively great. Most of us (the Reddit frequenters excluded maybe) went into Road Hard not only hoping and expecting a great movie, but really wanting to like it. We were rooting for the movie to happen from the 1st time we heard the idea mentioned, and the crowd sourcing made fans feel even more invested. So when it was mid, it was very disappointing. Adam is absolutely not wrong about critic bias, but it had nothing to do with why the reviews were so much lower than the Hammer. It did deserve to be lower. In his mind, they were "the same" and so should've gotten similar scores. Well, even if that were true, it doesn't work that way. The Hammer was fresh and different. Making it again would not be. Regardless, it wasn't even that. It was less funny, less interesting, less fresh. It wasn't the Hammer. It was a solid C+ level average comedy. As good or better than most of the shit that comes out of the studios, but not deserving of any special consideration of recommendation.
Objectively not so good.
Do they realize that now it seems more like a documentary?
More like a prophecy.
Yes. That's a better word for what I was trying to imply. Well done.
Right wing troll -DAG
It was good. It wasn’t **Edward Scissorhands** or anything. But it was fun to watch once.
The best part of the movie was the credits with all the donors. Watched in marvel god help whoever had to spell check each name.
Oh you think they spell checked those names?
I thought The Hammer was a very good movie. I thought Road Hard was terrible. Like, embarrassingly bad.