O lendário grupo de mercenários liderado por Barney Ross precisa impedir o início da Terceira Guerra Mundial. Quando as coisas saem do controle, Christmas e os membros da equipe são recrutad... Ler tudoO lendário grupo de mercenários liderado por Barney Ross precisa impedir o início da Terceira Guerra Mundial. Quando as coisas saem do controle, Christmas e os membros da equipe são recrutados para impedir que o pior aconteça.O lendário grupo de mercenários liderado por Barney Ross precisa impedir o início da Terceira Guerra Mundial. Quando as coisas saem do controle, Christmas e os membros da equipe são recrutados para impedir que o pior aconteça.
- Direção
- Roteiristas
- Artistas
- Prêmios
- 2 vitórias e 7 indicações no total
Lucy Newman-Williams
- Russo
- (as Lucy Newman Williams)
Kenny 'Cowboy' Bartram
- Anton
- (as Kenny "Cowboy" Bartram)
Resumo
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.
Avaliações em destaque
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.
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.
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.
I was a little excited in this; after all I'd spent my teenage years watching The Expendables, especially since the first three movies had come out during high school for me. So, it was somewhat surprising to hear about its revival a decade later, although not entirely unexpected given the trend of remakes and sequels these days.
The humor in the movie isn't the greatest, but it becomes a central theme after the action scenes. It's not its strongest quality, but I didn't watch it for that; I was in it for the action. Sylvester Stallone seemed like a bored retiree, Iko Uwais as Rahmat acted overly tough and full of himself. And then there's 50 Cent, who displayed Herculean strength (which, I must admit, I kinda liked). The highlight was definitely when they played 50 Cent's song "Pimp"; I wish they had played it longer. It felt like a throwback to the old Expendables, where the movie paid homage to all the actors' previous iconic works.
The film came across as a B-list action movie with big-name actors, rather than a big studio blockbuster. However, in comparison to the first three films, the cast was a huge downgrade. Could've been better with more of the original cast, or even the younger actors from the previous 3rd installment. Despite it tanking at box office, I still enjoyed expendables 3. I had believed that the introduction of the young cast was setting the stage for the franchise's future, so it was a shock to see some of the old familiar faces return again, along with a few new additions. Megan fox and 50 Cent made it feel even more like a B-list movie, and the returning members from the original cast seemed past their prime. What was once a star-studded ensemble now appeared to be filled with well-known B-list actors at best. Remembering that this franchise has seen Sylvester Stallone, Jason Statham, Jet Li, Dolph Lundgren, Terry Crews, Randy Couture, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Mel Gibson, Harrison Ford, Antonio Banderas, Wesley Snipes, Scott Adkins and Steve Austin.
Action scenes were good but not spectacular, which felt mediocre in today's standards. This was made worse because some of the CGI wasn't great, causing the big action sequences to pale in comparison to the hand-to-hand combat scenes that required fewer effects. They clearly didn't have an unlimited budget, some CGI scenes looked okay, while most seemed rushed.
I think the first half of the film tried too hard, overemphasizing building connections between the characters. We already loved for these characters from three previous movies, so this additional attempt in the first 30 minutes somewhat undermined the preexisting chemistry, which sucked, especially considering the significant plot twist that followed.
The story wasn't great, at best tolerable, and it didn't offer any remarkable moments, progressing rather generically. It could have been paced a bit quicker. And for dumb action movies like this, it doesn't even need a complex story; just good old dumb action done right. I also wished the deceased character had stayed dead, as it would have made the emotions the movie tried and failed to invoke in the first act seem even more pointless. The accents felt forced, and I think some of the conversations, especially among the henchmen, should've been in their native languages. Could've been more believable that way.
I was excited for this, but not surprised it was a disappointment. Most recent sequels, like Shazam, Transformers, Fast X, and Indiana Jones, haven't impressed much. The early Expendables films were so good because they brought together legendary action stars, and I believe that if they had stuck with that formula, featuring the new action stars of our time, along with a solid plot and budget, this movie could have had a fighting chance.
The humor in the movie isn't the greatest, but it becomes a central theme after the action scenes. It's not its strongest quality, but I didn't watch it for that; I was in it for the action. Sylvester Stallone seemed like a bored retiree, Iko Uwais as Rahmat acted overly tough and full of himself. And then there's 50 Cent, who displayed Herculean strength (which, I must admit, I kinda liked). The highlight was definitely when they played 50 Cent's song "Pimp"; I wish they had played it longer. It felt like a throwback to the old Expendables, where the movie paid homage to all the actors' previous iconic works.
The film came across as a B-list action movie with big-name actors, rather than a big studio blockbuster. However, in comparison to the first three films, the cast was a huge downgrade. Could've been better with more of the original cast, or even the younger actors from the previous 3rd installment. Despite it tanking at box office, I still enjoyed expendables 3. I had believed that the introduction of the young cast was setting the stage for the franchise's future, so it was a shock to see some of the old familiar faces return again, along with a few new additions. Megan fox and 50 Cent made it feel even more like a B-list movie, and the returning members from the original cast seemed past their prime. What was once a star-studded ensemble now appeared to be filled with well-known B-list actors at best. Remembering that this franchise has seen Sylvester Stallone, Jason Statham, Jet Li, Dolph Lundgren, Terry Crews, Randy Couture, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Mel Gibson, Harrison Ford, Antonio Banderas, Wesley Snipes, Scott Adkins and Steve Austin.
Action scenes were good but not spectacular, which felt mediocre in today's standards. This was made worse because some of the CGI wasn't great, causing the big action sequences to pale in comparison to the hand-to-hand combat scenes that required fewer effects. They clearly didn't have an unlimited budget, some CGI scenes looked okay, while most seemed rushed.
I think the first half of the film tried too hard, overemphasizing building connections between the characters. We already loved for these characters from three previous movies, so this additional attempt in the first 30 minutes somewhat undermined the preexisting chemistry, which sucked, especially considering the significant plot twist that followed.
The story wasn't great, at best tolerable, and it didn't offer any remarkable moments, progressing rather generically. It could have been paced a bit quicker. And for dumb action movies like this, it doesn't even need a complex story; just good old dumb action done right. I also wished the deceased character had stayed dead, as it would have made the emotions the movie tried and failed to invoke in the first act seem even more pointless. The accents felt forced, and I think some of the conversations, especially among the henchmen, should've been in their native languages. Could've been more believable that way.
I was excited for this, but not surprised it was a disappointment. Most recent sequels, like Shazam, Transformers, Fast X, and Indiana Jones, haven't impressed much. The early Expendables films were so good because they brought together legendary action stars, and I believe that if they had stuck with that formula, featuring the new action stars of our time, along with a solid plot and budget, this movie could have had a fighting chance.
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.
Você sabia?
- CuriosidadesJason 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."
- Erros de gravaçãoChristmas 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.
- Versões alternativasSeveral 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.
- ConexõesFeatured in The Critical Drinker: Expend4bles Is An Embarrassing Wet Fart (2023)
- Trilhas sonorasEvery Time
Written by Sertac Nidai
Courtesy of APM Music
Principais escolhas
Faça login para avaliar e ver a lista de recomendações personalizadas
- How long is The Expendables 4?Fornecido pela Alexa
Detalhes
- Data de lançamento
- País de origem
- Centrais de atendimento oficiais
- Idiomas
- Também conhecido como
- Los indestructibles 4
- Locações de filme
- Empresas de produção
- Consulte mais créditos da empresa na IMDbPro
Bilheteria
- Orçamento
- US$ 100.000.000 (estimativa)
- Faturamento bruto nos EUA e Canadá
- US$ 16.710.153
- Fim de semana de estreia nos EUA e Canadá
- US$ 8.039.021
- 24 de set. de 2023
- Faturamento bruto mundial
- US$ 37.917.985
- Tempo de duração1 hora 43 minutos
- Cor
- Mixagem de som
- Proporção
- 2.39 : 1
Contribua para esta página
Sugerir uma alteração ou adicionar conteúdo ausente
Principal brecha
What is the Canadian French language plot outline for Os Mercenários 4 (2023)?
Responda