Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Fast & Furious 6 (2013)

This is topic Fast & Furious 6 (2013) in forum Film Handlers' Movie Reviews at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=4;t=001952

Posted by Sam Graham (Member # 2889) on 05-26-2013, 09:59 PM:

CINEMA: 13th Avenue Warren, Wichita, KS
AUDITORIUM: 14
PRESENTATION: Dolby Digital Cinema/THX
PRESENTATION PROBLEMS: Audio during the trailers sounded like ass (but not during the feature). And what the flip are those streaks on the screen?
RATING: Three stars (out of four)

THE PLOT: The bad guys go after the bad guy who wants a microchip so they can be good guys. Wackiness ensues.

This is the 2013 release I was waiting for most. Not "Iron Man 3". Not "Star Trek: Into Darkness". THIS one. The one who's predecessor made me literally scream "HOLY SHIT!" in a crowded theatre when they teased this one during the credits.

They tease the next one during the credits in this installment as well, but it didn't make me shout obscenities. I did smile real wide, though. And the audience were clearly stoked walking out.

Anyway, our street racing heroes have evolved into international supercops in a ridiculous over-the-top spectacle of amazing stunts, action, and humor. This includes two of the best cat fights ever.

There's lots of little touches I laughed at that this audience didn't even react to (like how one of the guys has Dwayne Johnson's character's number programmed in his phone as "Samoan Thor")

The one complaint I had was the lame final plot twist that led to the big finale...though I have no complaints about the big finale itself.

Posted by Robert Harrison (Member # 3202) on 06-05-2013, 01:06 PM:

I have a complaint about the finale. How long was that damn runway? It must have been about 200 miles long seeing as they were going at it with that aircraft for about 15 minutes without anybody slowing down.

Otherwise, entertaining, except for the volume being at a constant 9 million decibels.

Also, what's with the title card saying only "FURIOUS 6" when advertised as "FAST AND FURIOUS 6?" I know the last one was simply "FAST FIVE." What will the next one be called? "AND THE 7?"

Posted by Stu Jamieson (Member # 4626) on 06-08-2013, 04:52 PM:

When armed with a decent script, director Justin Lin can knock out a pretty decent action movie. He hasn't always been blessed with decent scripts, however. In the past it seemed that the F&F movies could only succeed when ripping off a decent prior story. The Fast and the Furious (2001) was practically a carbon copy of Kathryn Bigelow's Point Break and Fast and Furious (2009) had elements very reminiscent of Bill duke's Deep Cover. Finally Furious 6 presents an original script which doesn't completely suck like its predecessors: 2 Fast 2 Furious, Tokyo Drift and Fast 5.

The film begins with a nice round-up of all the films so far over its opening credits, foregoing the big opening action sequence of its predecessors. This is probably a good thing given the outrageously impossible opener for Fast 5.

In movieland there is a fine line between the very, very unfeasible and the downright impossible, but the difference is critical for wowing audiences whilst simultaneously allowing them to suspend their disbelief and thus preserve the fantasy of the story. Admittedly, ignorance is bliss too. Fast and Furious got it right; Fast 5 got it horribly wrong (thanks mainly to its opening sequence). Thankfully, Furious 6 once more moves to the positive side of the equation (if only marginally).

From this cast, which mostly reprises that of the previous film, we get what we expect in solid terms. All the girls are pretty. The diverse array of cars are mean and fast (though there's still no Monaro or GTHO!) Diesel is Diesel and we love him for it. Same for The Rock. Thankfully Dwayne Johnson is less lubed up in this one. Indeed there's even a playful joke or two referencing his excessive moistiness in [/i]Fast 5[/i]. And with the films obligatory sequel-suggesting epilogue, this franchise is starting to look as good as The Expendables cast-wise!

The result is a film which is as fun as it is outrageous. Given that half the movies in this franchise are now good ones, let's hope that the 7th instalment makes it a majority.

7.5 out of 10

Posted by Jarod Reddig (Member # 6363) on 06-09-2013, 12:56 AM:

Man what is up with the 13th St Warrens screens??? My wife and I went there to see Breaking Dawn Pt.2 last year in the Grand Theater and the screen was completly streaked with what appeared to be tear marks. I told about 3 different staff membors about it and they had no idea what I was talking about. Prolly because the screen drops after every feature so no one notices the screen issue. I came to the conclusion that the curtain is rubbing against the screen when it goes up or down. ITs weird cause we always go to the 21nd St Warren and the presentations are top notch as well as eveything else.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 06-09-2013, 04:55 PM:

You could be right, the curtain might be scrubbing the matte coating off the screen. Could be a large 7-Up too maybe...

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 06-09-2013, 07:39 PM:

quote: Robert Harrison
what's with the title card saying only "FURIOUS 6" when advertised as "FAST AND FURIOUS 6?" I know the last one was simply "FAST FIVE."

I'll bet the original title was simply "Furious 6" but the marketing department did a survey and found that most people didn't know what the %$#@ that meant. so they revised the title (but were too cheap to change it in the release prints).

God only knows how people figured out what "Fast Five" meant. Maybe people are gett6ing stupider with time?

Posted by Pravin Ratnam (Member # 1417) on 06-12-2013, 11:39 PM:

I preferred the 5th one to this one. 5th one at least had a couple of good vehicle stunt sequences. The 6th one was just monotonous to me in terms of the staging of the stunts. And people, including me, in the theater gasped audibly, bullshit, when Vin catches Michelle mid air and lands on the car. It was just a ridiculous scene even by the movie's action standards.

PRESENTATION : Regal Perimeter POint 10. Atlanta. Screen#4. Their second biggest screen. But the bulb was a little dim. I noticed the same for Evil Dead in the same theater, and looks like the same stupid bulb is in there.

Posted by Stu Jamieson (Member # 4626) on 06-13-2013, 08:58 AM:

The most ridiculous thing about these movies is that Michelle Rodriguez is cast as a good looking bird.

Posted by Jonathan Goeldner (Member # 4854) on 06-18-2013, 11:34 PM:

saw this on Xscapes Xtreme screen (70ft) over in Brandywine Maryland - can't say I was particularly impressed with the image, it seemed a tad fuzzy and not that sharp. For a Christie system it didn't wow me. Given the audio is 5.1 on a 10.2 system, it was so bombastic and loud it seemed rather pedestrian and a mush of sound, over head sound placement was nil. F&F 5 was fun, but this installment seemed twenty minutes too long and the logic (and physics) of the action scenes were just silly