« Uncovering "The Ruins" | Main | Who will rule the summer boxoffice? »

I stand corrected: "The Ruins" doesn't completely suck

Ruins1_2 Contrary to my earlier fears, The Ruins turns out to be a fairly decent adaptation of Scott Smith's novel - up until the chickens--t last two minutes.

You can read my review here. It'll be interesting to see how the film fares this weekend, considering Paramount has pretty much dumped it.

Also, here's hoping the alternate endings that were shot but not used end up on the DVD Blu-ray. The worst of the three is the one that made it into the film. The other two sound pretty cool.

Shine If bloody movies about killer shrubbery don't do it for you, then go check out Shine a Light. I'm not even that big of a Stones fan, but the movie is so good that I may go see it again in IMAX just for fun.

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451b26169e200e551a532b48833

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference I stand corrected: "The Ruins" doesn't completely suck:

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

can't fight this feeling anymore

The idea of Keith Richards' face on a giant IMAX screen is scarier than anything The Ruins could dish out.

SwitchOffThatLight

I AM a Stones fan and saw and loved the first IMAX movie, shot during their 1989-1990 Steel Wheels Tour, and the setlist for that one was MUCH more inspired than the string of tired oldies Scorsese captured for this film. Why isn't there anything from A Bigger Bang, the fine new album this tour was supporting? And Christina Aguilera doesn't belong on a stage with the Rolling Stones. Maybe in the dressing room for a post-show encore (which would make for a more interesting film scene than seeing Jumping Jack Flash again), but on the same stage? PASS.

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | Copyright | About The Miami Herald | Advertise