I've seen 2 Coen movies now and they were both pretentious piles of *beep*

There we go! Got you all fired up now!

1st I didn't say it gets thrown around because it's a cop-out. Basically what I meant was in your case it's a cop-out.

2nd I am not a coen fanboy. If you read what I said you would have seen the part where I say that I don't even think that much of Burn After Reading. That I simply thought it was funny. I did say I think the Coens are one of the best working today. Thats just fact. Good filmmaking is not subjective. But where you picked up that I am a Coen fanboy...I am not really sure. Clearly you are a little upset over all this. Which was kind of the whole point of talking to you in the first place. You care so much about a film you don't like. I never understood that. I don't go onto boards of films I didn't like. I have nothing to say about those films. Unless you ask me. Then I will tell you. But anyway...

3rd Like a previous poster said. You are the only person here who believes there is a lot going on in this film, like as if it has layers or something. The film is very easy to get. Because there is not much to get. By me saying you didn't understand it I'm not saying you are not smart or you don't understand because its so deep. I'm saying you are dense. You either get the humor and you find it funny. Or you don't. It's plain and simple. And like a previous poster said you defined the word and you still do not get it. You simply repeat that the Coens films are pretentious piles of *beep* (I'm sorry. The TWO that you have seen) Yet both the films you mention are not overly artsy or difficult to understand. They are very simple films that showcase just how talented they are. Because they can make films about nothing. Or the same story thats been done a thousand times before. And they own it. Because they are extremely talented filmmakers. Again this is fact. There are good filmmakers. And there are bad ones. Anybody who knows anything about film, films, or filmmaking can tell the difference. No not because they are smarter than you. Or because they understand all kinds of *beep* that you don't("Thats just some paranoid fantasy you have about filmmakers). That is not what I said. I never said that. But it didn't stop you from going on a rant for a paragraph(Oh the *beep* irony. You see sir, THAT. THAT *beep* RIGHT THERE. That is the definition of a cop-out. It's the default response to ANYBODY calling ANYTHING pretentious. The comment itself only adds to the pretension. Hard to understand? How *beep* out of touch with outside world do you have to be, when you need a film to let you know the world is grim and life is pointless?") about god knows what. It sure didn't have much to do with what I said. I certainly don't need a film to see how grim life can be...I agree? Not sure where you were going with that but...moving on.

In closing I would like to say that all I did was challenge your rash opinion about something. You replied in with a rant where you told ME twice to take my fanboy goggles off and pull the stick out of my ass. When I in no way came off any more excited than you did in your post(I mean again, who comes to a board for a film they didn't like just to tell fans of the film they think it and its filmmakers are pretentious? A pretty angry dude. But thats for another time). I came at you for the same reason everyone else did. Not only are you trolling (which is grounds for anybody to think you are uncool) but you are throwing around a word that has nothing to do with this film. Had you come on to say a Black Swan board and said something like "hey does anybody else think this is a little overrated? I mean I liked it but..." and being taken seriously. But they way you went about it made you an easy target. No hard feelings pal. I just wanted to see if you would tone it down and acknowledge that maybe you could be wrong. But it didn't work out like that. Again no hard feelings...

I'm so impossibly certain that mickeylbrown is just a kid that it's not even realistic. If you could be 10 times more certain of something than a 100 % certain (meaning the exact most certain you can be), it still wouldn't be enough.

I didn't read the entire thread so this might've been covered. I only read the first two pages since my head nearly exploded out of the pure rudeness and (awesomely ironical) pretentiousness that he exhibits. Oh I'm pretty sure he is a guy also, but not as sure. And if he claims some age that seems improbably high it's because these kinds of people gladly lie to earn their claims credibility. He's not 42 years old, I promise.

I mean, how can you only have seen two Coen films and have them being No Country For Old Men and Burn After Reading. You'd have to be born in the 90's at earliest. How can you be so upset that people like films that you don't get? And when I say get, I do not mean that you are too stupid to like them, but that you don't get why a lot of people think they are so good.

I have that same relation to Avatar, The Hangover, The Departed and The Dark Knight. I don't think any of those films are bad, would never say "worst movie ever made" or something else ludicrous, but I really don't get what's so good about them. They're average for me.

Avatar looks like it takes place in a computer animated environment, the characters look like computer animations, and I can tolerate bad effects. But having most of the film look like a computer game takes away from the realism and my viewing pleasure. And the plot is standard boiler plate, a rip-off of Pocahontas that is ripped off from Dances With Wolves. Double ripoff. The themes about colonizing are so obvious that most mentally retarded people probably notice them. Talk about the opposite of subtlety.
Avatar is nowhere in James Cameron's personal top 5, yet many youngsters have it as the best movie ever made. Read here on imdb.

The Hangover is not laugh-out-loud funny on many occasions. The "drama" is so standard and predictable. A bad cameo from Mike Tyson. And it's one of the most immature comedies ever considered good. And the kids keep raving about Zach Galifanikis' character, the worst part of the movie, extremely annoying, immature and unfunny. They say it's the funniest movie ever.

The Departed is nowhere near Martin Scorsese's personal top 5. It's not smart. Jack Nicholson does some of the worst and most OTT performances ever, an impossibly not scary and just laughably stupid main villain. It plays as an action movie in gangster movei disguise and has none of the suspense and drama of his better films. Kids rave about it being the best movie ever. I saw Infernal Affairs, the film the Departed is a remake of, after I saw the Departed. So I had some of the viewing experience spoiled beforehand. And when you see a remake of a film or the original of a film you've seen remade you most often hate it. But I LOVED Infernal Affairs, I thought it was truly great, almost a masterpiece of modern cinema. They took everything that made it great, exaggerated it and made it cartoonish for the Departed. And that's supposed to be the greatest film ever made, it's not even close to being the best film with that story and there are only 2 films in that competition...

The Dark Knight is just one in a long line of "serious" comic book films as of recently. Most of the universe they derive from are really camp, so I like the more serious film adaptation. TDK benefited greatly from the hype concerning the death of the actor making a great performance and a great villain. But one great performance of a supporting player doesn't make a film great. The rest of it is mostly loosely stringed together set pieces. Some of it blatantly ripped off (opening scene - Heat) And I don't find action and explosions particularly entertaining. It isn't even as good as Batman Begins which I think was way better and very comprehensive, really as an origin story of a superhero it was as good as it gets. But it's not in my personal top 100 since even though it's the best superhero movie, there have never been a masterpiece in that genre yet.

But I don't do the "worst movie ever - you all are *expletive* idiots" just because I don't get what the fuzz is about. I think kids have really bad taste in movies. And I can get why people don't like Burn After Reading and No Coutry For Old Men. But it isn't hard to get why some like or love them. It's as simple as Burn After Reading being funny (not for every's sense of humor) and very tight, having great memorable characters and some would say it's suspenseful. And No Country is suspenseful and very tight. Also beautifully shot. It has a great villain but unlike TDK the villain is an intricate part of a good plot and suspenseful film, it's not a somewhat entertaining siddeshow. I think No Country is infinitely better than my 4 examples of films many kids consider "best movie ever". The real mystery is why so many young adults haven't seen more films or becoming more mature and clever as to not agree. The Hangover might be Todd Phillips best film, but his other films are utter garbage in my eyes. Really immature stuff, not funny at all for an adult.

The other 3 films though are from great directors. But none are close to being the director's greatest. Taxi Driver, Cape Fear, Goodfellas, Casino, Shutter Island, I could go on (Raging Bull for many, not for me though). Aliens, The Abyss, True Lies, The Terminator 1 & 2, and yes, Titanic. Memento, The Prestige, even Incepton, Insomnia and Batman Begins. All these are in my opinion very good.

You see, it's possible to like films of directors that you don't get two of their films. But I would never ever recommend the OP to watch Fargo or The Big Lebowski, even though they are widely considered masterpieces. He wouldn't like them.

So I want to ask the OP, and this is the only important part of my pot, tell us some films you like. Your 25 favourite films? I bet you like at least 2 out of my 4 films that I will never understand why they are so beloved by the younger crowd. You might not like The Departed since even that's too slow for you. You want explosions and gunfights. That's OK. But you are an idiot for being so rude to everyone with different taste (and I bet better taste). I can bet that the little kid OP is stupid. No smart person is that insultive to people for liking films with lower pace. And please tell us your made-up age.