Jack Reacher: Never Go Back : Currently a 6.3, really???

Typical movie where you turn off your brain and watch some mindless action to kill some time. 6.3 is entirely fair (i rated it 6/10).

If you read my original comment you'd see that a 6.3 rating isn't necessarily what I'm questioning. It's other movies rated 6.3 or even better that I would never say we're better movies. That's my problem with a 6.3.

6.3 is too much for this garbage. 4.5 is more fitting

6.3 is generous for a script this predictable.

It was unoriginal, we've all seen this movie before, either in France, London, USA etc. 2 Military people on the run trying to clear their names with a delinquent teen in tow, who just happens to be the daughter of a former junkie/prostitute. OH PLEASE! A sequel that did not need to be made. I give it a solid 6.

Fully agree

Heh, actually after reading all these 'disappointed' reviews, I honestly was expecting it not to be very good. My Dad and I just finished watching the Blu-ray and, frankly, I saw absolutely NOTHING wrong with it. AND I DID read the book! I thought that it followed the book just fine. I too rate it a solid '7', especially compared to many other films these days. FWIW, I DID find myself surprisingly disappointed with 'MISSION IMPOSSIBLE: ROGUE NATION' though. No matter what their weaknesses are, I frigg'n LOVE the first three films, but I felt really let down by the 4th one. Many others also mentioned that they had the same impression. It's like they were going for a more 'funny' Disneyesque feel, which to me personally just does NOT suit what I feel should be a very SHARP and clever franchise, even sharper and more clever than the Bond Franchise. Not one that families watch together and laugh GEEZ

Just my lowly and wretched opinion



I have over 8000 films; many of them very rare and OOP. I LOVE to trade. PLEASE ASK!

A number of the complaints I can at least understand with the movie being unoriginal or very clich. But like I said in my original comment (which I'm sure most of the complaints lately no one is actually reading, just seeing me questioning the 6.3 rating and giving their two cents why it's correct or too high), explain how Never Go Back has a lower rating than so many other sub-par movies??? Sub par movies that were made just to be sub-par movies.

To each their own, and if A+ movies are the only movies someone watches, sure a 6.3 is "okay" in my book for this movie. But the comparison I made in my original comment with The Force Awakens - an 8.1 rating for that movie and I literally felt like I was watching a remake of A New Hope. As far as I was concerned Force Awakens was unoriginal yet that has a much higher rating than Never Go Back.

Yes, yes, I quite agree

A LOT of films are indeed over-rated and compare as much lesser films.

Thus goes the IMDB world, unfortunately



I have over 8000 films; many of them very rare and OOP. I LOVE to trade. PLEASE ASK!

---

I thought that it followed the book just fine

---

Considering the writing in Child's books is so simple, it could be used as a screenplay, it didn't follow the book at all. The main thing - the book has only four dead people (two of which commit suicide), the movie around fifty. Second - Reacher and Turner HAVE SEX. OFTEN. Third - Sam is a cool, minor character, not an annoying, major one. And so on, and so on

Fighting a religious war is like fighting over whose imaginary friend is better.

Okay, okay I guess you are right. I honestly was thinking more about the overall plot and story line, that nothing major was changed. But, you are quite right; a lot of the DETAILS were indeed different

And yes, as I also mentioned (I think) in another thread, Lee Child's books usually are VERY simple

*** EDIT

(sorry, I kind of got carried away in my previous reply {redacted} I DID feel that your comment was condescending, but I still shouldn't have returned the rudeness, my apologies )

But with that said my imaginary friend can still kick the living $hit outta your imaginary friend



I have over 8000 films; many of them very rare and OOP. I LOVE to trade. PLEASE ASK!

I don't have an imaginary friend, no matter how much the society wants to force one on me.

Fighting a religious war is like fighting over whose imaginary friend is better.

Hmmm, I find the last part of your statement EXTREMELY hard to believe The world is becoming more and more secularized every day and MOST people are thinking like you do. So, unless you live in the middle of Vatican City or are from an extremist Muslim land, I can't imagine how you would feel ANY pressure what so ever to be 'forced' to believe in anything.

About the ONLY thing that comes to mind (although you said 'Society') is that you might come from a religious family that pressures you to go along with what they believe. But, 'Society' I don't think so

***EDIT

I suppose that some Asian lands, that perhaps families may exert more pressure to conform to their 'Traditions & Customs' which would include many rituals and 'superstitions'


I have over 8000 films; many of them very rare and OOP. I LOVE to trade. PLEASE ASK!

I'm Serbian. Being religious or, at least, pretending to be is very big here.

Fighting a religious war is like fighting over whose imaginary friend is better.

Ahhhhhhhhh, now I see

Sorry about that mate; thank you kindly for letting me know!

Take care!




I have over 8000 films; many of them very rare and OOP. I LOVE to trade. PLEASE ASK!

Hate to say it but when you put your cult before you huge acting career it will and apparently is going down the drain. There's your answer 6.3.

It's at 6.1 now, and I think it's pretty much dead on. If it wasn't because Tom Cruise was in it it would have been a Straight to Video movie.

Seth Rogue One: A Star Weed Story https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com:443/data.filmboards/images/upload/DvGLO38.jpg

Yes, it's a piece of crap, but on a par with other movies of its type that get 6.7 up to 7.3. I wasn't disappointed with itit was watchable. So I think there's an extra factor turning people off here, which must be Tom Cruise. If people don't care about Tom Cruise enough to hate him, maybe it's that promotion and his name drew in more people than something like this could ordinarily get, and so it disappointed people expecting something different? I mean, is anyone who watches a Steven Seagal movie ever disappointed with it? Also, Tom Cruise's quote prevents getting a major box office draw for the female lead, so he's had that issue for years, too.

While I disagree it was a piece of crap which is neither here nor there, the comparison you make on other movie ratings is exactly my point.

It deserves lower tbh. It is generic and by the numbers.

This is bottom 5 Tom Cruise and one of his few bad movies.



7/10=good()5/10=mediocre

There were too many technical problems to ignore. Like how the feck they can escape from jetway door. Those door can't work without ID card or a code.


=============