I Mercenari si schiereranno contro: un trafficante d'armi che comanda la potenza di un enorme esercito privato.I Mercenari si schiereranno contro: un trafficante d'armi che comanda la potenza di un enorme esercito privato.I Mercenari si schiereranno contro: un trafficante d'armi che comanda la potenza di un enorme esercito privato.
- Premi
- 2 vittorie e 7 candidature totali
Lucy Newman-Williams
- Russo
- (as Lucy Newman Williams)
Kenny 'Cowboy' Bartram
- Anton
- (as Kenny "Cowboy" Bartram)
Riepilogo
Reviewers say 'Expend4bles' garners mixed reactions, with praise for its action scenes, star-studded cast, and nostalgic charm. Positive reviews highlight the fun, over-the-top action and the return to an R-rating. However, critics note significant flaws, including poor CGI, a weak plot, and lackluster performances, especially from Megan Fox and Sylvester Stallone. Many deem it the weakest installment, though some enjoy its straightforward action and cast chemistry.
Recensioni in evidenza
The Expendables in its conception was all about paying homage to action blockbusters of the 1980s & 1990s. Boasting an ensemble cast of action stars of former decades, it was a delight for all the action aficionados out there and it worked with a simple premise & minimal setup. It worked for a couple films but considering its latest entry, this franchise is in desperate need to be put out of its misery.
The 4th entry in the series, Expend4bles is as lazy & lacklustre as any action film can get and is horrible from start to finish. I'm fairly convinced there isn't a single set piece in the film that was practically constructed, for nothing looks remotely convincing on the screen & the VFX is simply atrocious. The plot is not even barely serviceable, is downright predictable, and even the actors (both reprising & new) look tired.
The 4th entry in the series, Expend4bles is as lazy & lacklustre as any action film can get and is horrible from start to finish. I'm fairly convinced there isn't a single set piece in the film that was practically constructed, for nothing looks remotely convincing on the screen & the VFX is simply atrocious. The plot is not even barely serviceable, is downright predictable, and even the actors (both reprising & new) look tired.
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.
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.
The rug has finally been pulled out from under the expendables, a film that cost close to a hundred million has hardly made a third of it back. A franchise that should have stopped after the first and is rumoured to continue for another trilogy should, for its own good, be put to rest. The original expendables was good fun and full of outrageous quotes and enjoyment but each passing sequel has suffered from declining plot and acting performance. I would have more tolerance for the movie if it didn't see to treat the audience as if they were brain dead at every turn. There's no creativity or thrill with the expendables anymore, if they never make another we will all be better off.
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.
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.
This sequel nearly a decade in the making clearly isn't made for long-suffering fans of this franchise, as most of the iconic cast barely has any screen time. The title should've been "Jason Statham and some of the Expendables."
And this also isn't made for people who like dumb cheesy action movies, as this movie plays it completely straight most of the time, rarely allowing campiness to show.
It also isn't made for people who like slick, cool action movies, as director Scott Waugh continues this series' streak of having directors who can barely string a coherent series of shots together to tell a story. Nearly every shot looks cheap and the progression of events is clunky as hell.
Woeful incompetence is how I'd describe most of what's seen in this film. It truly has some of the worst special effects I've ever seen put to screen. And it still cost $100 million.
So, I ask again, who is this for? Whose idea was it to make an action sequel that will appeal to absolutely NONE of its potential audiences?
If it weren't for the fact that this movie does have a half-decent third act and one impressive fight scene, I'd be saying that this is easily the worst of these movies.
But it's a contender for that title, and even so, I can still say this is one of the worst action movies I've ever seen in theatres.
And this also isn't made for people who like dumb cheesy action movies, as this movie plays it completely straight most of the time, rarely allowing campiness to show.
It also isn't made for people who like slick, cool action movies, as director Scott Waugh continues this series' streak of having directors who can barely string a coherent series of shots together to tell a story. Nearly every shot looks cheap and the progression of events is clunky as hell.
Woeful incompetence is how I'd describe most of what's seen in this film. It truly has some of the worst special effects I've ever seen put to screen. And it still cost $100 million.
So, I ask again, who is this for? Whose idea was it to make an action sequel that will appeal to absolutely NONE of its potential audiences?
If it weren't for the fact that this movie does have a half-decent third act and one impressive fight scene, I'd be saying that this is easily the worst of these movies.
But it's a contender for that title, and even so, I can still say this is one of the worst action movies I've ever seen in theatres.
Lo sapevi?
- QuizJason Statham has expressed his love for The Expendables. On co-star Sylvester Stallone, he said "Working with Sylvester Stallone is beyond a pinch yourself moment. I remember growing up watching his films, and to be directed by him, and to be in a movie that he's produced, and to be shoulder to shoulder with Sly is a privilege any man who loves action movies would never turn their nose up at. I mean, it's terrific. I'll do as many as he wants."
- BlooperChristmas turns a big container ship 180 degrees by dragging it around an anchor hooked to a big rock on the sea floor. Not only is that not how anchors hold a ship in place, the chain would've snapped instantly.
- Versioni alternativeSeveral versions were released in German, a "Not under 18" uncut version and an edited (approx. 3 minutes) "Not under 16" version. There is also "Not under 12" version which lacks approx. 20 minutes of footage.
- ConnessioniFeatured in The Critical Drinker: Expend4bles Is An Embarrassing Wet Fart (2023)
- Colonne sonoreEvery Time
Written by Sertac Nidai
Courtesy of APM Music
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
- How long is The Expendables 4?Powered by Alexa
Dettagli
- Data di uscita
- Paese di origine
- Siti ufficiali
- Lingue
- Celebre anche come
- Los indestructibles 4
- Luoghi delle riprese
- Aziende produttrici
- Vedi altri crediti dell’azienda su IMDbPro
Botteghino
- Budget
- 100.000.000 USD (previsto)
- Lordo Stati Uniti e Canada
- 16.710.153 USD
- Fine settimana di apertura Stati Uniti e Canada
- 8.039.021 USD
- 24 set 2023
- Lordo in tutto il mondo
- 37.917.985 USD
- Tempo di esecuzione1 ora 43 minuti
- Colore
- Mix di suoni
- Proporzioni
- 2.39 : 1
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti
Divario superiore
What is the Canadian French language plot outline for I mercen4ri - Expendables (2023)?
Rispondi