This review writes itself. Its The Expendables 3, everything you need to know can be gleened by looking at the DVD cover.
If you have 126 mins that you need to kill and nothing else to do, this will fill that time criteria.
You know exactly what you are going to get before you start, and it doesn’t disappoint, or whatever the opposite of disappoint is.
Its as goofy and cheesy and predictable and explody as you should expect.
I give it 6 1/2 worn out 80’s action starts out of ten.
(the half is the asian dude because he is small)
Purge 2 is one of those odd movies that is better than the original. Admittedly the only thing the original had going for it was the premise of the purge. The casting sucked, the acting sucked the everything sucked. Which is why i just gets 5.5 at imdb
Purge 2 however, fixes all of that. The cast is great. Perfect b-movie cast with the quintessential horror movie girlfriend Kiele Sanchez, as, well, the girlfriend.
P2 takes us out on purge night as someone other than the 1%er who can lock the fortress doors.
You WILL be incensed at the lackadaisical to the beginning of 24hrs of killing attitude of the characters, but maybe if you have lived through a dozen you would go to the store 10 mins before it starts too.
My vote, 7 bludgeoned corpses to clean off the driveway out of ten.
Yes, these are the guys the west is supporting.
Well, its simple, i like facts, and so far there re none. Well one, MH-17 crashed.
Thats it, thats all we know.
Sure it crashed over a war zone, for want of a word.
Imagine if it had crashed 30 mins sooner or later, totally different story.
Heres what might have happened. (with likelinesses)
- It just crashed out of random aviation bad luck. (possible)
Hey, accidents happen.
- Russians shot it down from Russia. (no chance)
Why? This makes no sense at all except to retards like McLame
- Donbas shot it down from within Donbass on purpose. (Impossible)
Again, for what purpose?
- Donbass shot it down from within Donbass my mistake (Possible)
Maybe, i don’t know how those launcher things work.
- Ukraine shot it down by mistake. (possible)
- Ukraine shot it down on purpose, (possible)
The bs coming out of Kiev has been beyond Baghdad Bob proportions.
- Something else (maybe)
lets keep an open mind.My choices? Either 1,4, or 6. But we wont find out the truth for another ten years or so.
- Just thought of this; Ukraine deliberately had traffic sent lower over the hot zone hoping something like this might happen
Unfortunately Petro Pork is the kind of person who would think of that.
China, fortunate to not have been beaten down by the politically correct police has issued some public safety posters that accuratly get their point across to help fight their terror problems.
[sic] is really beginning to piss me off. What is its purpose? Other than the user to point out ‘Ooh look at me, i noticed a typo that the original author didn’t. This is me smugly pointing it out to you that i am superior in someway”
I mean, couldn’t you have just fixed the typo? You knew what they meant, but no, you had to type 6 extra characters instead? If its some olde worlde translation and you think your readers might not figure that out for themselves, either get better readers, or stop being a self important ass.
If you are direct quoting something with an odd spelling such as this example from the Wikipedia entry on sic,
“The House of Representatives shall chuse [sic] their Speaker …”
then fine. But the most important thing to remember is [sic] totally destroys the flow of a sentence and spoils the reader experience. But with the ever incorrect corrections of auto correct, the brains ability to fix miplest wrods berfoe you raed them and the increasing use of text like shortenings in product names encountered daily, i have to ask do we need [sic] outside of technical, reference or research papers?