Los indestructibles 4

I am a big fan of Stallone's movies and Statham too. So, consequently I love the first two Expendables. Great action masterpieces. Third one was bland because a great mistake: PG-13. Then we got this abomination that has nothing to do with the spirit of the Expendables movies. I don't know how to start but I'll try.

First, the Fx's are horrible. Why? The movie has the graphics of my PC from 1996. I mean VGA level. How is it possible to approve an action movie that looks so cheap?... Stallone's action movies are always great in action, Fx's and choreographies. What happened here?...

Second, the cast looks more tired than my grandmother, she is 92. Dolph Lundgren is excusable because his illness, but what about the others?... Anyway, I can keep going but it is not necessary. If you love the first two Expendables just watch it again. Avoid this cr@p. The franchise is absolutely destroyed.

A film that should have been better, but unfortunately had a mediocre director.

Not everything in the movie is bad, but overall this could have been a great movie.

Well, let's start with the good stuff:

Jason Statham works well in an action movie as usual. Stallone is in his element, although it would be better if he was a little more in the film. Iko Uwais is not bad at all as a villain and he is a good addition to the film. Andy Garcia is also a good choice for this movie. The rest of the team is mostly good, with a few exceptions, some should have maybe gotten a little more time in the movie.

And now, the bad part:

The biggest problem with this movie is the mediocre director. If they had a better director, this film could have been great, it turned out to be just tolerable, and that's because most of today's film production is garbage.

There is too much "shaky camera" that makes every movie look worse than it really is. Such scenes simply look cheap.

The CGI looks pretty bad, which is odd considering this isn't a cheap movie, but a bad director made it look cheap.

The film lacks that real cinematic look, I don't know if it's because of the type of camera, so everything looks too artificial, it doesn't have the look that older films had, where everything looked monumental. This looks like a documentary, with ultra-sharp resolution, and yet it looks cheap, as if we're looking through a window.

Basically, the director is the worst thing about this movie, everything else is not nearly as bad, not even some really hilarious casting choices.

In the end, the film could have been great, it turned out to be just another mediocre film, and it's sad that even as such it is better than most of what "modern film production" offers us today.

..... I was underwhelmed. I wasn't expecting much and it delivered on that. Tony Jaa was one of the best parts of the film. As a character.

The action is what you'd expect. Fists, feet, guns, knives and explosions it was however more visceral than the previous three and whereas I like action, I don't care for violence. When it feels like it's more about shock and less about adrenaline, I check out mentally.

The humor was more juvenile than I care for also. Not all of it. But a few key moments was like "Who wrote this, Judd Apatow?" (the answer is no. Actually very decent writers including ones who wrote Equilibrium.) The cast was all over the place. I get adding Iwo Kuwais and Tony Jaa. But 50 cent, some random Spanish kid, some odd Asian chick and some second random bad guy just don't fit into who this series was for and about. And it's GLARING what they should've done different.

They added Andy Garcia which is a nice old blood touch but come on. He's not Mel Gibson, JCVD, Bruce Willis, etc level .

Megan Fox ... I really like her. I've liked her in many things. But... Not this. Her intro is so shrill it's difficult to care about her later. And she's under about 15lbs of makeup. And you still wonder about more established female action heroes that could've been used. Charlize Theron? Scarlett Johanson? Kim Basinger? Uma Thurman. IDK.

I kinda don't care if they make a part 5 and as hard as this bombed, I'm sure they probably won't.

Here I thought Meg 2 was the worst movie of the year; then comes Expend4ables 4, a geriatric actioner whose digital work alone is so pedestrian as to instill disbelief rather than fear. Major players Jason Statham and Sylvester Stallone head a loose crew engaged to stop very bad guys from getting nuclear weapons.

If you were able to hear all the dialogue over the din of rapidly firing guns, you would know that there's not a speck of dialogue worth remembering. Of course, there's macho male joking often relating to sex, no better than locker room raunch from a presidential hopeful.

The rest of the conversation is not so much about how the arsenal could destroy the world as it is about getting revenge on rivals.

Stallone and Statham have a few minutes of banter that make you wish for much more. They are better than a film that was PG-13 until it ramped up the violence to the current R, a strategy with no distinction because John Wick does it with style and Equalizer with class.

For Expend4bles, violence is a money grab with no aesthetic value. Gone is the talented writer Stallone credited in the first three and director in the first. For that matter, not even the energy and creative contributions of Norris, Ford, Willis, and Li. The franchise is going to Statham, an always charismatic presence lost in his flat hat, scowl, and innumerable easy targets, who apparently haven't yet figured out how the guns work because Christmas (Statham) delivers his presents much before they have figured out how to shoot.

With a sometimes-promising new cast that includes a randy Megan Fox as a CIA operative, little time is given for character development with time-consuming bullets. Even more outrageous is the cheesy CGI with backgrounds that look to be from the silent era. The giant airline transport plane looks like a toy in a cloud background fashioned by Pee Wee Herman. The $100 million cost of this lost labor is hidden, and the hidden CGI is lost in chaotic closeups where you can barely tell, for instance, if it's Megan Fox, and believe me I looked for her.

I have a nostalgic spot for Stallone's remarkable career and respect for Statham's tough exterior/warm interior characters, but Expend4bles is no advance for either. Here is a comic thriller that embarrasses an industry with a history of getting better all the time. Not this time.

After this discussion, I have decided Expend4bles is the worst movie of the year.

Fun film for B or A- action film. Director was poor in camera work. Seriously stop the shaky cam. It's annoying. Fox maybe her worst acting job... which is saying a lot being such a mediocre actress anyway. However, if you like Meg this movie is more or less good for you.

I recommend low expectations as at best a popcorn action film. No crazy plot or insane action. Really typical action with a little over the top unrealistic action sequences we have come to know with this serious. I enjoyed the movie for what it was but I can understand why there is likely not going to be a 5th. I think the magic is pretty much gone.