initiated by carol on September 19, 2008 (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0351977/)
Compared to the Scorpion King the Rocks acting is getting better. This is not the best film, but for action I would watch it again. The Rock from his wrestling days is a good physical actor, like Stallone, and Arnold. This is a must, not many people can do physical acting, and that is half of what makes a good action movie. That action film with the guy from Cruel Intentions shows how awful an more
Compared to the Scorpion King the Rocks acting is getting better. This is not the best film, but for action I would watch it again. The Rock from his wrestling days is a good physical actor, like Stallone, and Arnold. This is a must, not many people can do physical acting, and that is half of what makes a good action movie. That action film with the guy from Cruel Intentions shows how awful and action movie is with out good physical acting. That movie had 1) too little believability. 2) emotions of pain, physical stress do not look real 3) the action looks phony and out of place. If people think Stallone did not take some real punches for Rocky they would be mistaken, for Rocky would loose it realism with out physical realism. That part said, I find the story line good, but inferior to the original. I like true storys better than fiction. Bad events like this story shows really do happens; I would bet this movie is going be on TBS 'Guy who like movies' week. One thing I notice in this film is the Rock seems to have a real nice streak in him, I wonder if that is ture or more to do with the movie.6 or 7 out of 10 depending if you seen the original Walking tall, for the film becomes more believable if you see the original.
