Movie News

The Kidd Vs. SNOW WHITE AND THE HUNTSMAN

Published at: June 1, 2012, 6:35 p.m. CST by The Kidd

 

Is it so much to ask for a cool live-action Snow White film? After all, with three of them being worked on not too long ago, the odds were favorable that at least one of them would get it right. MIRROR MIRROR came and went, hardly claiming the throne as “the fairest of them all” and Disney’s plan came to an abrupt halt after The Mouse realized there’s no need for another entry into the Snow White arena. That leaves Universal’s attempt with SNOW WHITE AND THE HUNTSMAN as the last and probably best chance for this idea to succeed. It doesn’t.

That’s not to say SNOW WHITE AND THE HUNTSMAN is a bad film. It’s not particularly good either, but there is enough here to like that it just leaves you with the bitter taste of disappointment over what could have been had they been able to piece the whole film together. SNOW WHITE AND THE HUNTSMAN could have been the epic action-adventure first-time director Rupert Sanders was aiming for. Unfortunately, there’s plenty not to like as well, and that is what really winds up overshadowing some of the more positive elements. SNOW WHITE AND THE HUNTSMAN ends up as a middle of the road fairy tale retelling with far more ambition than it’s able to execute. That’s what happens though when you have serious story issues and character problems that are too much beautiful visuals to overcome.

SWATH starts off with a strong enough build. It establishes the dynamic between Snow White (Kristen Stewart) and the evil queen Ravenna (Charlize Theron), following the death of the king. Stewart, at least at the outset, exudes a quiet strength that helps keep Snow White alive, even as she faces the threat of the queen who needs her innocence and purity for her own salvation. What feels like the story’s prologue does a wonderful job of getting Theron across as our deliciously evil villain. She’s just a shade beneath over the top, but, in walking that fine line, Theron creates a nemesis for Snow White we know will go to whatever lengths necessary in order to maintain her power and keep her beauty. All of this is done with the use of her magical powers which saps strength and youth from the hearts and souls of others, even though that’s all based on assumption, because between her taking powers from a traitor’s heart nearly Mola Ram-style or sucking the breathe out of a young girl’s mouth, it’s never quite explained how either affect her standing as a woman battling age. Does she need hearts? Does she need oxygen? Which does she need more? Are they both the same? Is it a matter of preference in the moment? That’s really just nitpicking on an otherwise magnificent character, because every time Theron sets foot on the screen, SNOW WHITE AND THE HUNTSMAN springs to life. No wonder there’s interest in doing a Sleeping Beauty film from the side of Maleficent. The bad is easily more fun to watch, and I wouldn’t have had a problem seeing something far more extended with Theron’s Ravenna at the center of it.

Yet Ravenna winds up being a big part of why SNOW WHITE AND THE HUNTSMAN has such major failings, because frankly there’s just NOT ENOUGH CHARIZE THERON!! After a healthy serving of her to open the film, we’re only treated to her presence sparingly throughout the rest of the film, and, when you have a character as fun to watch as her, the rest of the movie winds up paling in comparison when it’s filled with characters lacking her charisma. Theron clearly is on another level with her character work here that when her badness isn’t involved directly, the movie becomes plodding and unexciting. If you’re going to cut back on her scenes, then don’t give us a lot to whet our appetite in the beginning. It just leaves us wanting more the further the movie progresses, and receiving crumbs along the way isn’t going to cut it.

We do get a lot of the queen’s brother Finn (Sam Spruell) though, which hurts the film, because it completely renders the titular Huntsman useless. After Snow White escapes the Queen’s clutches and escapes into the Dark Forest, Ravenna sends her brother out to find someone who isn’t afraid to venture into this dangerous place in order to find and recover her former prisoner. Enter Chris Hemsowrth as the widowed drunkard who’s given a proposition that’s tossed aside rather quickly in order to do the job. Only it’s not solely the Huntsman’s job. Finn comes along for the ride, in addition to a few other henchmen… so if the Queen’s brother was capable of going into the Dark Forest himself, why is the Huntsman necessary? Taking it one step further, after the Huntsman and Snow White team up and do their best to move ahead to safety, to find the Duke who still finds under the banners of the long dead king, Finn and his crew continue to track down the pair every step of the way, in every location they stop, lazily recycling the same action beat over and over when the story needs a pick me up. I get that there still needs to be some sense of peril for this newly matched duo after the Huntsman turns, but to have a character that serves the exact same purpose as what the Huntsman was originally intended for, who winds up doing it better as well, severely undercuts why the Huntsman is even a part of the story.

He’s not the only extraneous character tacked onto the film. Snow White is given a childhood friend in Sam Claflin, who plays the Duke’s son William. After abandoning Snow White to the Queen, the Duke’s son hangs around the periphery, waiting for Snow White to one day come back into his life, so he can join her fight as Legolas. No, seriously… that’s about all he’s good for. SNOW WHITE AND THE HUNTSMAN makes a valiant attempt to do something LORD OF THE RINGS-esque with its sprawling landscapes, fantastical interludes and ideas of “The One” fighting dark forces to once again bring life and prosperity to the kingdom… but it’s not even close to matching the storytelling quality of Tolkien’s classics, particularly Peter Jackson’s adaptations of them, and having a cheap knock-off of Orlando Bloom wielding a bow and arrow isn’t going to bring you nearer.

    

Let’s talk Kristen Stewart though, because, with all the rest of the film’s weakness, she could be the redeeming quality that winds up saving SNOW WHITE AND THE HUNTSMAN. But it’s not to be as Stewart is ridiculously overmatched and is like trying to find a round peg in a square hole. Maybe in some other universe, Kristen Stewart would have made the perfect Snow White, but, after an opening that had me believing she could pull this off, she was required to do a lot more in the role that she just wasn’t capable of. I will give her this… there is none of the lip-biting and very little of the deep-breathing that she’s been criticized for in the past, namely in THE TWILIGHT SAGA, but her expressions are mostly limited to this open-mouthed look of constant concern that Snow White at times feels like Kristen Stewart’s parody of herself. She must go from this beautiful yet vulnerable prisoner to someone capable of leading an overthrow of the Evil Queen in the course of two hours, and the story doesn’t do her any favors in getting anyone to buy into that transformation. She’s never given any training to fight or lead an army, outside of one awkward lesson on defending herself from an attacker, a far cry from entering into a massive battle. And when it is her turn to take command, something she hasn’t shown even an inkling of being prepared for during the film, as she’s always following or being taken care of, she gives the most uninspiring inspiration speech to get her troops fired up for combat. I’ve gotten more chills from the pep talk in LITTLE GIANTS than from this truly flat portrayal of Snow White.

If SNOW WHITE AND THE HUNTSMAN does anything right, it’s the look of the film. SNOW WHITE AND THE HUNTSMAN really does look quite incredible, from scenery to the creature design. Sanders is able to make the most of the film visually, which doesn’t sound all that far-fetched from someone who got their career started by helming commercials. New takes on the Mirror and the Dark Forest manage to work creatively, but they’re nothing more than fancy dressings on the film’s deeper wounds.

The dwarves wind up being the perfect representation of everything that’s right and wrong with SNOW WHITE AND THE HUNTSMAN. When they’re first introduced, they show so much potential, not relegated to their individual characteristics as those in the Disney version, and their chemistry as a rough and tumble group of dwarves, capable of taking care of themselves bravely with a hint of humor, make them a welcome addition to a film that continues treading water towards its resolution. But just as quickly as they spring onto the scene in a serious manner, they’re suddenly and inexplicably played for laughs in the third act. That’s just like SNOW WHITE AND THE HUNTSMAN. For every one thing they do well, they follow it up with quite a few not so good.

Overall, SNOW WHITE AND THE HUNTSMAN is a tremendously wasted opportunity. Somewhere, among all of its faults and flaws, problems and missteps, there are parts that could have made one exciting SNOW WHITE AND THE HUNTSMAN. It’s too bad parts don’t make up a whole movie. The film winds up being fairly easy on the eyes, but is yet another reminder that things looking cool just isn’t enough.

 

-Billy Donnelly

"The Infamous Billy The Kidd"

BillyTheKidd@aintitcool.com

Follow me on Twitter.

Readers Talkback

comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • June 1, 2012, 6:37 p.m. CST

    BILLY THE DIKK...

    by Johnny Wrong

    ...rides again.

  • June 1, 2012, 6:41 p.m. CST

    Second! Its the new first!

    by ray a

    I won't be seeing this movie...not in my lifetime.

  • And, as always, fuck the haters. The end.

  • June 1, 2012, 6:47 p.m. CST

    very disappointed with this movie

    by Professor_Bedlam

    It was very uneven and the character development was weak. It sometimes felt like it was just going through the motions and emotions instead of it being genuine feeling and interaction between the characters.

  • June 1, 2012, 6:52 p.m. CST

    There's no reason to be a twat, johnnywrong

    by canucklehead

    The review's bang on.

  • June 1, 2012, 6:55 p.m. CST

    Stewart was pitch-perfect; Theron was all over the place

    by trevanian

    Theron did the low stuff okay, but the hysterics were embarrassing. I couldn't believe how good Stewart was; I told my wife this could be Paula Attreides if they wanted to change up DUNE a bit for the next go-round. I'm pretty convinced that between voice and face and mannerisms, she is pretty much it. And no, I've never seen any TWILIGHT movies, so I'm not inclined to see her in a bad light just yet, just bask in the light of this one, which is also a pretty good movie. Check out Stewart's pro baseball player's slide into the sewer, too.

  • C'mon...your whole career is based on a series of movies that teach young girls one thing: that they really need to have a boyfriend.

  • June 1, 2012, 6:58 p.m. CST

    It's not about money... it's about sending a message.

    by Pedro Cruz

    Total waste of off-camera talent. You should never neglect the story!

  • June 1, 2012, 7:10 p.m. CST

    trevanian do yourself a favor then

    by shane peterson

    and never watch the Twilight films. They will only hurt your opinion of Stewart.

  • I there's a great movie in there! Perhaps a director's cut is needed. At least they didn't add more Tatum.

  • June 1, 2012, 7:18 p.m. CST

    Yeah, the Queen's brother is 100% useless to the story!

    by Stereotypical Evil Archer

  • June 1, 2012, 7:20 p.m. CST

    I'm glad that all the ROMANCE was between a Dwarf and Snow White.

    by Stereotypical Evil Archer

    Why did the Queen need a backstory? It's Snow White, not Snow Grey.

  • Directed by Chris Cunningham...woot!

  • June 1, 2012, 7:33 p.m. CST

    Billy the Kidd VS. Zzzzz....

    by Negator76

    I'm sorry, but every time I try to read one of this guy's reviews, I feel like I'm stuck at a dinner party seated next to the dullest person at the table. Give me Quint, or even BEAKS, any day of the week. I disagree with Beaks a lot, but he has a coherent viewpoint and he articulates it well. Hell, even Harry's reviews are more interesting! Between his awful writing and his poorly-judged sexual references, his reviews are Talkback Gold! I don't understand why the Kidd was hired, what he brings to the table, and why he is all over this site. I'm sure he's nice enough, but he's a snooze who writes just well enough to avoid outright ridicule, but not nearly well enough to be a good reviewer.

  • June 1, 2012, 7:36 p.m. CST

    Little Giants was good for one thing

    by thelordofhell

    Watching the Little Cowboys get their asses kicked

  • Thor was good in it though. So were some of the fantasy creatures.

  • June 1, 2012, 7:45 p.m. CST

    THE REVIEW IS NOT "BANG ON"...

    by Johnny Wrong

    ...it is one man's opinion. And that man is a shit reviewer. But hey, that's my OPINION. Which I'm entitled to. You twat.

  • June 1, 2012, 7:51 p.m. CST

    AND COUSINLARRYAPPLETON...

    by Johnny Wrong

    ...if you think Kristen's career is a result of Twilight, then you're cinematically ignorant in the extreme. Try doing your homework and watch Adventureland, On The Road, The Runaways, Into The Wild, Zathura...etc. Too fashionable to hate on the poor girl 'cos she took a payday franchise...which anyone would.

  • June 1, 2012, 7:57 p.m. CST

    Snow White ...... Snow Way!!!

    by DrMorbius

  • June 1, 2012, 8:21 p.m. CST

    As Kathy Bates said in The Stand...

    by Andrew

    "It's not looking good for the Kidd". Enough of this douche.

  • June 1, 2012, 8:39 p.m. CST

    Round peg, square hole

    by originalmemflix

    The cliche only works when written correctly. You cannot fit a square peg in a round hole. However, its inverse, you can. Also, why would anyone try to LOOK for a square peg in a round hole? If you try to be clever, you come looking less than. One more thing: Movie lovers want to see good movies. When you write Kidd vs. Movie Title, you come off as a movie hater, ready to slay the next film that comes your way and boy, do you! Dude, it is super easy to write a vicious review about a bad movie, why not try another angle? Anyway, this is definitely the last time I read any more Kidd vs. posts. I come here for movie love, not movie hate.

  • June 1, 2012, 9:46 p.m. CST

    Not enough Charlize Theron....

    by Just_Some_Guy

    ...naked, straddling me! That would make it all right in the world, if Charlize Theron would just lay nekkid on me. And then do stuff. Nice stuff. Fun stuff. Stuffed in stuff. Stuffed. Heh. Stuffy stuff stuff stuff stuffy stuffiny stuff stuff. For stuff. Charlize Theron is a nice looking lady. She's neat. Neat like feet. Good like wood. Fun like bun. Cool like school. Awesome like...awesome. Holy shit I'm so drunk...... Yay! Go movies!

  • June 1, 2012, 9:57 p.m. CST

    johnnywrong

    by canucklehead

    You never gave your opinion, you onky posted a simpleminded insult on someone reviewing site. This is why it's HIS opinion. No one cares about YOUR opinion, that's why you have no forum, only someone else's to drag on coat tails. twat.

  • June 1, 2012, 10:12 p.m. CST

    SWATH fell apart after "hELLO!!!"

    by luke_lymon

    The Huntsmans kiss was the last good part of the movie. The romance should have begun after that but instead, for whatever unbelievable stupid reason, they make Snow White into an inspiring warrior? What??? There wasn't enough of a foundation to the movie to make it worthwhile to toss so much in at the end. I was not inspired enough to appreciate the leap of forced faith. Who wanted to close the movie by rushing it to its end? Put her in an armor, ok, now quick, get her on the throne and put a crown on her and forget about the never failing romantic end because who wants that? Screw the idiot and idiots that neutered the movie. It was working beautifully all through the movie until she put that armor on. And even that might have worked if force the speed dating on us. GAH! Why WHY WHYYYYYYY And correct me if I am wrong. Wasn't the movie delayed because they were trying to make improvements? Really?

  • June 1, 2012, 10:36 p.m. CST

    They key is to read the Kidds Reviews as if it's opposite day

    by Charlie

  • June 1, 2012, 11:08 p.m. CST

    Snow White isn't wearing armor to fight, she's wearing it for protection

    by The_Genteel_Gentile

    as she takes the lead as the spiritual muse of her fighting force - ala Joan Of Arc. Why would that be so implausible, when we know something quite similar happend in actual recorded history? I bought it.

  • June 1, 2012, 11:23 p.m. CST

    The ending was quite romantic in a very nice subtile way.

    by The_Genteel_Gentile

    Snow seems distracted by all the pomp around her reclaiming the thrown and istead is simply looking for The Huntsman. When he makes himself visible to her, only then does she feel secure enough to settle into her triumph. Because unlike Ravenna, Snow will measure success with love and peace - not power and position. The Huntsman embodies all the noble traits that Ravenna declared abset from men. The looks exchanged at the end infer all the romance needed. The future for them is apparent; His steadfast devotion will earn him a place along Snow's side as her husband and King. It's all there on the screen, some of it just isn't spelled out to death. The notion is clearly present and that's all that is required.

  • June 2, 2012, 12:09 a.m. CST

    The Kidd is like Bizarro Harry

    by DidntPullOutInTimeCop

    He's picking every movie apart like a grown up. "The Kidd"...

  • My gawd that was a boring piece of crap but a well shot piece of crap. I walked out around the part after Stewart bored the troll monster into submission. And up to that point in the film, she says like, three sentences. And Theron, could have put a little something else into her part than angry bitch girlfriend mode. Yeah, we got it the first five minutes of the movie, you're evil and want to stay young, move on, juggle for us, do something remotely entertaining. I didn't even care to wait for the Dwarfs to show up. I'll catch the rest on video someday. Maybe watch Mirror Mirror too, but that has Julia Roberts, so nah.

  • June 2, 2012, 1:07 a.m. CST

    The Huntsman was needed...

    by Nick

    The Huntsman was needed because the queens powers did not work in the dark forrest. She flat out says it in the movie. Yes the queens brother could go into the dark forrest but she would be unable to help him if he became injured or lost in some fashion in the woods. The brothers rapist tendencies get the best of him causing the events to transpire the way they did. But the Kidd is always trying to find something wrong with everything. Maybe if he payed attention to the movie he wouldn't have the issues he had. They never said they would have a hard time finding her, they just didn't want to go into the dark forrest without the protection of the queen to retrieve her. So all Kidds bitching about the story rendering the huntsman's role useless is completely unfounded.

  • June 2, 2012, 2:26 a.m. CST

    Hey Billy bob Kid. Good review.

    by Ld

  • June 2, 2012, 3:21 a.m. CST

    This movie was entertaining beyond expectations

    by CeejayNightwing

  • June 2, 2012, 5:11 a.m. CST

    This guy is the worst movie reviewer of all time

    by ajit maholtra

  • June 2, 2012, 5:22 a.m. CST

    Here's how you know the Kidd is a dick:

    by FluffyUnbound

    Even when you agree with him, you read his stuff and say to yourself: Wow, this guy is a dick. If you can irritate even those readers who agree with you, it's time to consider some personal changes.

  • June 2, 2012, 7:15 a.m. CST

    nickthesith

    by dancetothebeatofthelivingdead

    I get it. They needed the Huntsman because the Queen didn't want her brother to go into the forest where she couldn't protect him. So, they went and got the Huntsman and the Quen's brother went with him into the foret where she couldn't protect him. The after the Huntsman changed sides, the Queen's brother went after them in the forest where the Queen couldn't protect him. So....why again did the Queen need the Huntsman? Was your post designed to make The Kidd look stupid? Because all you did was explain a little more in depth why the Huntsman wasn't needed, just like The Kidd said in the first place. If the forest was that bad and her protection was needed that much, than not only would her brother not have gone in with Thor, but as soon as Thor flipped, he would have been out of there. The fact that the Queen's brother was brave enough to go inot the forest, even with Thor, and then go on alone after Thor falls in love with the 2 X 4, pretty much invalidates the need for Thor at all.

  • If Terry Gillian couldn't make it work, why did anyone think "the guy who directed the commercial for Halo 3" could pull it off? Enough already!

  • June 2, 2012, 8:54 a.m. CST

    Needed more Theron... and more Tatum!

    by mdk

  • June 2, 2012, 9:58 a.m. CST

    FATAL Flaw! WHo's the fairest?

    by film11

    No way will I pay to see this in a theater, as the concept already has a major problem. See, Snow White is supposed to be the "fairest of them all"...that means "fairer" than the Evil Queen. So if the Queen is Charlize Theron, Snow White needs to be someone who's looks would blow away Charlize. Would that be Kristen Stewart?

  • June 2, 2012, 9:59 a.m. CST

    Or maybe that's how I perceive her

    by UltraTron

  • June 2, 2012, 10:01 a.m. CST

    No. Actually, she does have that look

    by UltraTron

  • At a dull party? Don't despair, add more Charlize Theron? Your work assignments getting you down? Bring in Charlize Theron around the office in a slinky dress. That'll pep you up. Are your work outs at the gym dull and tedious? Get Charlize Theron as your personal trainer! That'll help with your bench press numbers. At the very least, you'll pull a muscle trying to impress her with your overloaded barbell lifts.

  • I say bring in Charlize Theron to the EU summits; her loveliness will help solve all disagreements, and the Dow and Nasdaq will shoot up 1000 points!

  • It's bound to be shallow, yet visually exciting. These kind of movies are like videogames, they're about what passes in front of your eyes, rather than worrying how the grey matter behind them will perceive such a thing. It's dumb, throw-away entertainment.

  • June 2, 2012, 12:38 p.m. CST

    Puzzled by hate for reviewer

    by Cyrus Clops

    Seems like a well-written review that lays out what he didn't like about it pretty clearly. I'm not sure what people are objecting to here. Is it a case of, "This reviewer disagrees with me, therefore they suck"?

  • June 2, 2012, 1:06 p.m. CST

    Shocking Breaking News - Kristen Stewart Can't Act!

    by Matt Szczerba

    "her expressions are mostly limited to this open-mouthed look of constant concern"

  • June 2, 2012, 1:17 p.m. CST

    The Kidd vs. Not Sucking

    by john

    so far it's like 0 and however many reviews he's shat out.

  • p.s. you have a small penis. :) Fact to back this up would be that your sister told me.

  • yeah I said ugly male...whoot whoot!!!

  • June 2, 2012, 1:47 p.m. CST

    "The Kidd" .... worst reviewer this site has ever had.

    by ScreaminBrains

    Seriously. How many bags of Harry dicks did you suck to land this gig? The whole "VS" thing is retarded as fuck. Plus, your avatar is balls.

  • June 2, 2012, 2:04 p.m. CST

    Isn't anyone else going to mention...!!!

    by Darryll

    that the whole fairyland segment is a wholesale rip off of Studio Ghibli's PRINCESS MONONOKE? Every element, and especially the mystical stag, was blatantly lifted from Miazaki's masterpiece. Go back and check it out if you don't believe it. You will be appalled! I was livid and it ruined the movie for me. Theron was good though.

  • June 2, 2012, 2:34 p.m. CST

    I actually trust Kidd's opinion...

    by Roketopunch

    more than Harry's. Harry has really bad taste. Is anybody really surprised that this movie is bad. Whatever Stewart is in, sucks shit balls.

  • It's a heterozygous dominant trait. It was a no-win situation for you.

  • June 2, 2012, 2:57 p.m. CST

    @antonphd - What did I just write?

    by The_Genteel_Gentile

    An accurate account of what took place in the film. Close you mouth and pull your thumb out sometime and you too may one day be able to decipher aesthetic nuance without requiring narrative piledrivers to get the point accross. Teenage girls are obviously smarter and more sensitive than you. One does benefit by holding on to just a shred of humanity. But seeing as your senses are hopelessly dulled, I do therefor pity you. As for me... well, there's one sure-fire way you can find out all you ever need know about me; You name the time and place and you just try me hotshot. An ass kicking? From the likes of you? Fat chance. I live in California if you wanna make a date! ...or were you just kidding? In which case...ahh, yeah - so was I... hehe...

  • Do you? Kristen Stewart this, Michael Bay that, George Lucas touched me here, Taylor Kitsch makes me question my sexuality, blah-blah-blah-blah! Get some new schtick, or better yet - how about dropping the schtick altogether already. Precocious left the room some time ago and pathetic took his place.

  • June 2, 2012, 3:08 p.m. CST

    All this hate for the Kidd is hilarious.

    by TheyPeedOnYourFuckingRug

    Sure, he needs an editor just like everyone else here, but this is a competently written review that gets its point across coherently and isn't stuffed full of paragraphs of first-person ramblings about the author's childhood, toy collection, and encounters with industry figures. Considering we're in the middle of the worst, most atrociously dumbed-down era for film in many years, if not ever, we could do a lot worse than a skeptical reviewer for whom the status quo of formulaic PG-13 bullshit doesn't cut it.

  • June 2, 2012, 5:17 p.m. CST

    How does one be a condescending douche without proof reading his grammar?

    by Tikidonkeypunch

    Kidd is hit and miss with me at this point.

  • June 2, 2012, 6:17 p.m. CST

    The Kidd is fine

    by MurderMostFowl

    You folks who hate reviewers on this site... what do you want? 6 bobble head reviewers that reread press releases? The who point of a site of multiple reviewers is so you can find out your own personal alignment and taste, and listen to other people's insight. Even if what they ultimately have to say you disagree with, that's important. You're getting the truth one way or another. Say what you want about the reviewers on this site ( even Harry ) 97% * of the time, they're giving their honest review. And 3% of the time, someone feels it's necessary to put money and access above genuine love of film ... sorry I've got to call it out. Fortunately so far it's pretty easy to spot.

  • June 2, 2012, 8:06 p.m. CST

    The Kidd

    by Vitruvian_Man

    I don't want to discuss this review too much. From all the reviews I've read here and on other sites, I'd say he is spot on in his opinions. What I would like to sound off on are the nerd/twat/assclowns on this site (not exclusive to here of course) who think they are the smartest, most clever, most insightful, end-all movie gods bar none. It's a movie site guys. It's a GD website, not life and death! I've been on this site for years and from what I've seen, Billy is a hard working reviewer who knows his shit! You may not agree with all his opinions, but that's not really required if you are have an intelligent and versitile mind is it? Agree or disagree with the review. Don't be like every other lame fuck on the internet and stoop to personal attacks. And stop with the grammar Nazi shit too...unless it's Harry of course. I think we are all on the same page with that. Just about every one of us make errors in syntax. If I want to read about that shit I'll go to a writers site! We are all smart SOB's, I get it! Let's be here and post for the right reasons ...our love of movies. The Kidd gets it.

  • Not to be mistaken with the special-needs reviewer; the uneducated one, the one who struggles with the English grammar, who's either desperate to be friends with people actually involved in movies, or genuinely has no taste and appears to love pretty much anything pumped out and labelled 'a movie'. Those who don't care for the Kidd's reviews, I wouldn't worry too much, as I imagine he'll move on to a professional site or proper publication one day! Working at AICN must be a stepping-stone to a better, smarter and a more credible job! Only criticism I have is perhaps the Kidd needs to invest in glasses, as he describes Stewart as beautiful. Or perhaps he's just being polite! (...which isn't necessary as people in the film industry aren't stupid enough to come here, or read anything published on this site)

  • June 2, 2012, 9:39 p.m. CST

    I felt every minute of this flick.

    by shutupfanboy

    Its has a lot of beautiful images and some nice scenes. Yet, Stewart was not ready for this role and the dwarves were wasted. Helmsworth does his best, but its not enough. I did like the Pillars of Earth reunion.

  • June 2, 2012, 9:46 p.m. CST

    It's all visuals with clumsy storytelling...

    by Logan_1973

    And Stewart is fucking adorable. You guys would nail her to the wall if you had the chance. FACT.

  • June 2, 2012, 9:48 p.m. CST

    judging from the trailer...

    by DocOpticus

    The movie is worth admission for the artistic inspiration. The apologetic glimpses we see of Stewart in the trailer indicates that she stinks this movie to high heaven.

  • June 2, 2012, 10:44 p.m. CST

    Kristen Stewart has the acting range of a cigar store Indian

    by kanye west

  • But I do recall actually intently watching the film I'm speaking to without prejudice and then assessing its qualities based on its cinematic merit rather than some abstract notion of what might make the perception of my "coolness" a little stronger for my internet constituency. Whereas you clearly stated you haven't even seen the film and yet you've taken it upon yourself to speak ill of my taste. Well, unlike you I base my opinions, such as the one that your a glib windbag, on legitimate verifiable proof taken directly from the source. No cheap shots here, no pithy slanders, nor resorts to profanity - just the matter-of-fact melancholy truth. Someday maybe you and your ilk will muster the courage to reconcile that truth amongst yourselves. I sincerely hope that you do. In the future please know your subject before commenting on it. Now blow your nose and tuck in your toes!

  • June 3, 2012, 12:04 a.m. CST

    I liked the film and agree it needed more Charlize!

    by Tristan

    I thought she did a fantastic job and it's a shame that she wasn't on screen much in the second-half. The cinematography, sets, costumes and special effects were superb. The first-half of the film was excellent. I thought the film kinda dragged, as soon as they met the dwarves (but the dwarves were cool). It's just the story\script seemed to be lazy. Stewart is beautiful, but she always has her mouth opened and that "stare" look. Acting wise, she wasn't very interesting. Hemsworth was good, but his character became less and less important. I still think the film is worth watching, for the visuals and Charlize.

  • June 3, 2012, 12:04 a.m. CST

    I liked the film and agree it needed more Charlize!

    by Tristan

    I thought she did a fantastic job and it's a shame that she wasn't on screen much in the second-half. The cinematography, sets, costumes and special effects were superb. The first-half of the film was excellent. I thought the film kinda dragged, as soon as they met the dwarves (but the dwarves were cool). It's just the story\script seemed to be lazy. Stewart is beautiful, but she always has her mouth opened and that "stare" look. Acting wise, she wasn't very interesting. Hemsworth was good, but his character became less and less important. I still think the film is worth watching, for the visuals and Charlize.

  • June 3, 2012, 1:45 a.m. CST

    I really don't get all the Kidd hate around here...

    by REMcycle

    Come on...it's a perfectly good review...a bit opinionated, but that's what we read reviews for, no? I don't see why so many of you just lay into him...you'd rather have another one of Harry's "I saw this film when I was five...and it was so eye opening that I ate 12 pizzas, became a fat fuck diabetic rolling around in a wheelchair and got really good at sucking Tim League's cock...so that means the movie is good!" reviews? Beaks or Quint? They're good, yes, but I can read their review a million times in a million papers. Kidd's are good because they do everything Beaks and Quint do, but go a small step further into the "personally, I thought...." zone. Sometimes that's all a review needs. So knock it off with all the hate. Chances are, your opinion of the movie is "um, it was good...or something..." or, if you're in Austin, "WOW, the picture at the Drafthouse is so great that I'm ignoring my 75 dollar food and beer bill and the fact that the movie pretty much sucked. Love you Tim!". Please!

  • June 3, 2012, 2:34 a.m. CST

    Booooring

    by Bass Ackwards

    Someone above remarked that the screenplay was lazy, couldn't agree more. Screenwriters sitting around wondering how to make the audience care about its characters, umm, just give them all sad back stories. Being sad is the same as being interesting right? And Stewart was the weakest link by a wide margin, it'd have been nice to see a decent actress in the part, someone who could have actually conveyed the grace all the charactera kept telling us she had. The film would have likely still been a snooze-fest though.

  • June 3, 2012, 6:10 a.m. CST

    I was surprised at how consistant Stewart's accent was.

    by whatevillurks

    I was almost buying her as Snow White......but then she put on armour and engaged in combat. It felt like everytime we were really getting a look at the Queen's motivations she would dissapear for long stretches of the movie. The mirror vanished too. I'm wondering if her brother was kept young my raping women. It was better than MIB III though.

  • June 3, 2012, 6:52 a.m. CST

    Out of curiosity, which one of Kristen Stewart's holes is square?

    by Crooooooow

  • All are the fucking same!

  • June 3, 2012, 10:49 a.m. CST

    Torrented this flick... and glad that I did. Spot on review.

    by juice willis

    Plus I found Kristen Stewart's enormous front-teeth profoundly distracting. Seriously.

  • June 3, 2012, 1:34 p.m. CST

    Wish to HELL people would stop imitating Lord of the Rings

    by FeralAngel

    That's part of what killed the Narnia films.

  • June 3, 2012, 3:25 p.m. CST

    Dredd is coming September 21

    by coolfan123

    Prepare to be judged.... http://www3.picturepush.com/photo/a/8400166/1024/various/Judge-Dredd-film-poster---version-2bcd.jpg

  • June 3, 2012, 3:55 p.m. CST

    The deal with ...

    by Matt Litchliter

    She got her start in popular films and her rise was fast. The movies she starred in were more popular then her. She isn't really a name, yet. She is famouse because

  • June 3, 2012, 5:43 p.m. CST

    Re: the comments about the armor and fighting...

    by Celicynd

    I enjoyed the movie and thought I'd comment on something. While I can understand a lot of the gripes about the movie, theres a few people on here that keep commenting on how Snow White in the armor and fighting took them out of the movie... Did you see the same movie I did? She clearly wore the armor for safety and to be a symbol for the army, not because she could actually fight. She never actually fights anyone in the movie except for two spots. The first is when she's charging to the doorway where the steps to the throne room are, and when she gets to the first one-on-one fight, the guy proceeds to slam her into a wall. The second is when she fights the queen... which also doesn't go at all well and she gets thrown around the room and almost dies. She only wins because of the "trick" that the huntsman shows her earlier in the movie, not because of any actual fighting prowess.

  • Absolutely fucking horseshit. Not because he didn't like the movie - but because of what he cited as flaws of the movie. Wow, a lot really flies over his head! How the FUCK does Finn render the huntsman useless? He was the only one who had been in the forest before, so they needed someone to guide them. Its explained IN VERY EASY TO UNDERSTAND WORDS. Don't get me wrong, there is plenty to nitpick on with this film, but Kidd's criticisms point out more of his limited capacity than it does the quality of the film. Each of his reviews ring out the same tired song - and in the end, its not his opinions that are the problem, its just that he's very bad at what he does - writing and critique. AICN is a big enough entity that it doesn't need this kind of substandard reviewer. It sort of makes me feel like I'm reading a movie review from a bad college paper.

  • I mean surely that one little thing couldn't be the only thing to give you such venomous remarks if so you're a douche. so what else... please explain in easy words for us all to understand. What else gives you reason to call his 'review' horseshit??

  • June 3, 2012, 7:13 p.m. CST

    spewbacca

    by Andrew

    Spewbacca, since you have about the same capacity to understand the obvious as the Kidd, I wonder if you're one of his many rumored sock puppets that defend him... Here, I'll say it again... The Kidd reviews movies in the most topical way possible, missing the point of most of what he critiques. Do you need specifics? 1. Not understanding that more of a good character (Theoron) doesn't equal a better movie shows me that he doesn't understand basic rules of film editing. 2. Calling Sam Claflin extraneous is REALLY stupid - he's the fucking character that links Snow White back to the Duke and the entire fucking battle. Does the Kidd sleep through movies or is he just kind of stupid - my vote is for the latter. 3. Comparing this movie to Peter Jackson's LOTR is about as fair as comparing Lost In Space to 2001. Just because its loosely in the same genre, doesn't mean its ripe for comparison. Different audience, different story - horrendous comparison (again, something out of a shitty college paper). 4. The criticism of Kristen Stewart not having training for battle again decries a reviewer who didn't pay attention to the movie - or is just actually stupid. Snow White is not doing battle, she is off to face the queen while the army gets her there. Again - IT IS EXPLAINED TO ANYONE PAYING ATTENTION TO THE MOVIE. Did I leave anything out? Does this help you understand what I said? Did I use small enough words?

  • June 3, 2012, 11:29 p.m. CST

    Kidd's Reviews are Fine

    by Todd1700

    There is absolutely nothing wrong with the Kidd's reviews. In fact I have rarely read one that I disagreed with. And compared to Harry's rambling ass shit that only occasionally mentions the movie being reviewed the Kidd's reviews are better by 10 orders of magnitude. The hatred for him is so bizarre and baseless I can only conclude that it's coming from little 12 year old internet trolls that sadly still think insulting people on the internet is a fun and original pastime. Hopefully in a year or so, after their testicles drop, they will discover masturbation and find something else to do with their time. If the Kidd's reviews trend to-wards being tougher on movies than some, then I say great. I'd rather a critics standards be higher as opposed to some brainless fucktard of the attention deficite disorder generation that would try to convince me one of the Transformers movies was "TOTALLY AWESOME DUDE". And if most of his film reviews end up negative that is probably because most of what Hollywood pumps out each year is utter shit.

  • June 4, 2012, 1:11 a.m. CST

    WHERE THE HELL IS MASSAWYRM...?

    by Zandunga

    He was the best reviewer on the site.

  • Until the child labor laws caught up with Harry.

Top Talkbacks