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
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.
An awful film, one that actually makes a mockery of The Cinema, anyone that watches trash like this, isn't going to rush back, for fear of having to sit through junk like this again.
An estimated budget of $100 million, if I waste money at work, I'd be sacked, you can only imagine the fallout od this movie for those st the top.
Excruciating viewing, I watched it because of an admiration for the first film, but this, I'm embarrassed for them, this is the worst film I've seen so far this year, it made Strays seem like a classic.
The only plus I can highlight, Jason Statham did at least try, he adds a few moments of humour, and does at least have some degree of sincerity. Now I know that both Sylvester Stallone and Dolph Lundgren have their fans, but their acting here, I'm not sure if wooden or diabolical spring to mind, my heart sinks to think what this turkey has done to both careers.
The script was woeful, and some of the dialogue had me cringing in my seat. Worst of all, The CGI, what on Earth were they thinking, it looks abysmal, where did the budget go, I'm assuming it's on the salaries.
Atrocious.
3/10.
An estimated budget of $100 million, if I waste money at work, I'd be sacked, you can only imagine the fallout od this movie for those st the top.
Excruciating viewing, I watched it because of an admiration for the first film, but this, I'm embarrassed for them, this is the worst film I've seen so far this year, it made Strays seem like a classic.
The only plus I can highlight, Jason Statham did at least try, he adds a few moments of humour, and does at least have some degree of sincerity. Now I know that both Sylvester Stallone and Dolph Lundgren have their fans, but their acting here, I'm not sure if wooden or diabolical spring to mind, my heart sinks to think what this turkey has done to both careers.
The script was woeful, and some of the dialogue had me cringing in my seat. Worst of all, The CGI, what on Earth were they thinking, it looks abysmal, where did the budget go, I'm assuming it's on the salaries.
Atrocious.
3/10.
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.
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.
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 $100 million.
So, I ask again, who is this for? Whose idea was it to make an action sequel that will appeal to absolutely NONE of its potential audiences?
If it weren't for the fact that this movie does have a half-decent third act and one impressive fight scene, I'd be saying that this is easily the worst of these movies.
But it's a contender for that title, and even so, I can still say this is one of the worst action movies I've ever seen in theatres.
Você sabia?
- CuriosidadesJason Statham has expressed his love for The Expendables. On co-star Sylvester Stallone, he said "Working with Sylvester Stallone is beyond a pinch yourself moment. I remember growing up watching his films, and to be directed by him, and to be in a movie that he's produced, and to be shoulder to shoulder with Sly is a privilege any man who loves action movies would never turn their nose up at. I mean, it's terrific. I'll do as many as he wants."
- Erros de gravaçãoChristmas turns a big container ship 180 degrees by dragging it around an anchor hooked to a big rock on the sea floor. Not only is that not how anchors hold a ship in place, the chain would've snapped instantly.
- Versões alternativasSeveral versions were released in German, a "Not under 18" uncut version and an edited (approx. 3 minutes) "Not under 16" version. There is also "Not under 12" version which lacks approx. 20 minutes of footage.
- ConexõesFeatured in The Critical Drinker: Expend4bles Is An Embarrassing Wet Fart (2023)
- Trilhas sonorasEvery Time
Written by Sertac Nidai
Courtesy of APM Music
Principais escolhas
Faça login para avaliar e ver a lista de recomendações personalizadas
- How long is The Expendables 4?Fornecido pela Alexa
Detalhes
- Data de lançamento
- País de origem
- Centrais de atendimento oficiais
- Idiomas
- Também conhecido como
- Los indestructibles 4
- Locações de filme
- Empresas de produção
- Consulte mais créditos da empresa na IMDbPro
Bilheteria
- Orçamento
- US$ 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