Best movie experience in a while...

Rating: 10/10 (24 April 2004)

I have to say, I have read many unfavorable reviews of the movie, including one from Ebert, and all of the reviews did the exact same thing: overcomplicated mundane details in the movie. For example, where Chirs Walken went in the movie. Well, If the movie starred Walken, I could see your point, but I obviously didn't notice. Ebert said the movie switched to an "unfortunate action formula". I thought there was a more than fair balance of action and depth. I mean, those who saw the trailer knew there was action in the film, it was rated "R", so what did you expect. I hate it when people overcomplicate movies, books, and anything else of this nature. And compared to some of the movies that have been coming out over the last few months, some just completely horrid (I'm looking at you Scooby Doo 2, a movie any child could walk out of and say, "What the HELL!"), Man on Fire was a more than welcome change, and when I say change, I mean a good movie. I saw it yesterday and I still can't get it out of my mind. People have also been ranting about the ending (SPOILER), which while shocking and sad. Trust me, If he would have done what MANY DIRECTORS WOULD HAVE HAD HIM DO, I would have felt cheated. Many thanks to Tony Scott and Denzel and the rest of the cast, because so many movies over the last year haven't even come close to sparking at the interest level this one did. Kudos.