MovieChat Forums > JustinJackFlash > Replies
JustinJackFlash's Replies
But that event and the pursuit of the bombers had already been portrayed in Patriots Day less than a year earlier. It's pointless repeating all that. This film is a more personal story about Jeff Bauman.
It probably would have been worse.
Trevorrow is a bland director and never made anything with much depth. Whatever your opinion of The Last Jedi, Johnson made Brick and Looper before Star Wars. He's clearly a much more artistic filmmaker. Even his worst pre-Star Wars film, The Brothers Bloom, is better than Trevorrow's best.
I'd imagine TLJ would be pretty much the same but without that whole Rashomon bit giving Luke's character a bit of depth and humanity.
It would still be cliched, overly comedic and CGI driven.
It is truly sad behaviour. But she should take solace in the fact that everybody who made the comments are nerds with no lives.
To obsess over a science fiction work to that extent is to cross the line of nerdism by a mile and means that any word you ever utter is instantly cast into the void of irrelevance.
And, yeah, her character was uninteresting and badly written but their was nothing wrong with her performance.
Benicio Del Toro on the other hand, who has hitherto been an actor of distinct legend, was awful in The Last Jedi. I bet those same haters made no such terrible comments to him. Not that they should. Just pointing out that they seemed to have singled Tran out unfairly.
If I thought about it for 5 minutes I could come up with about 30 to 40 shows that are better than The Walking Dead. I could only think of 2 or 3 that could debatably compete with GOT. The Wire, The Shield and Breaking Bad.
It seems strange to me how recently Iron Man has become heralded by many as a classic of the genre.
It was a reasonably fun film at the time but other than kickstarting the MCU there was nothing in and of itself that was in any way groundbreaking. What makes it is Robert Downey Jr's persona. A watered down version of the persona he'd just cultivated a year or two earlier in Kiss Kiss Bang Bang. A far more distinctive film that is easily more deserving of classic status.
Considering the comic book movies that were being released at the time, Iron Man felt like a big step back. Back then we were being blessed frequently with comic book films made by interesting directors that each brought something new to their work and gave their subject some depth. Sam Raimi's Spiderman films, Batman Begins, Sin City, X-Men 1 and 2, Hellboy, even The Dark Knight was released the same summer.
Take Downey Jr out of the equation and you'd be left with a conventional, run of the mill narrative accompanied by a bland directorial style and 3 action scenes that last about 3 seconds long (Ok, Stark breaking out of the cave in the old fashioned suit was pretty damn cool).
The film has nothing to say, no depth, doesn't explore any interesting issues and, with the exception of the post credits Nick Fury cameo to signal what's to come, does nothing new.
Maybe there is some kind of inner depth, subtext or element it brings to the table that I simply missed. And if so I'd be interested in hearing it. But all I can see is a film that's a bit of fun. And there are thousands of films that have been released over the years that are a bit of fun and have not been hailed as classics. I even see it in lists above the likes of Spiderman sometimes! The influential film that initially demonstrated how comic books were supposed to be adapted.
The only reason I can fathom is that because it led to a whole extended universe people look back on it with rose tinted glasses.
I concur. The finale blew my mind.
Two average films whose failings are blown vastly out of proportion by drama queens. You are correct. It is the BvS of Star Wars
Wtf?
Eh?
There's no way The Phantom Menace was better than TLJ. No way in hell. Yes, TLJ was disappointing. We get it. But The Phantom Menace was an absolute abomination. An, ugly, soulless, charmless, unwatchable chore. It's insult to filmmaking has become notorious to fans of actual film. Not just fans of Star Wars.
And no, that pod racing scene wasn't awesome at any time. Especially not that time. Memorable? I'd forgotten it before the film ended.
I'm looking forward to Solo like my next dental appointment. But it will not be worse than The Phantom Menace.
6.2 is probably fair. It's only really a bad film in comparison to the first two. It is a big step down. But objectively it's not a bad film. There is a fair bit of bad stuff in it. But there is some good stuff too. It's a mixed bag. It's got more going for it than that intensely boring Andrew Garfield one that followed it.
I don't think that's possible, dude. Maybe if you filmed a turd accompanied by the Star Wars score for two hours you might get a worse film. But that is just a maybe.
A cheesefest it was. Yet it was still 10 times more enjoyable than the previous two films.
Because there is not a soul on the planet that would be able to handle the awesomeness.
Robocop. I love The Terminator but Robocop has more to say. Aside from the whole 'What makes us human?' question that cyberpunk usually explores, it also satirizes 80s consumerist politics. It shows us a future so obsessed with material gain than even a man has become a product. Verhoeven's satirical style rocks.
It is very good. Though masterpiece is going a little too far.
Jackson's films are always full of imagination and King Kong is no exception. Just look at all the creatures on the island. The film oozes charm and Jackson is always creative with his set pieces, whether it be splatter comedy like Braindead or the blockbuster adventure we have here. There was a great build up and the period setting made it so much more interesting than the standard monster movies we get these days.
The film does get it's fair share of party poopers. Which is odd because it was critically adored on release. And I'm guessing their main gripe is the CGI. And fair enough, it is often pretty damn bad. It often looks unfinished. But I've always gone by the mantra that if the film is charming, likable and creative enough I will excuse bad CGI. I'm swept up in the film enough that it doesn't pull me out. And I felt that was the case here.
But still, we do need to be sparing with the use of the word 'masterpiece'.
Shot! He is down!
Yeah, I agree. They really should keep it as in the trailer. Funniest joke by far. Let's hope they don't spoil it.
From what I know of Pete Wisdom, he doesn't seem anything like him. Wisdom is all sarcastic and brooding.
X-Men: Apocalypse was a crushing disappointment. But to rank it the worst film of the year is a vast exaggeration. I'm sure if I think about it for just 2 minutes I could come up with at least 20 worse films from 2016.
There were parts of Apocalypse that were watchable, it had a few good elements: The Quicksilver and Wolverine sequences springing to mind. Independence Day: Resurgence however was unengaging, visual noise from start to finish. I can't think of one positive thing to say about it at all while Zoolander 2 was one almighty cringe.
People have a tendency to go over the top when it comes to disappointing films and lose all perspective. Is the film really a more traumatic experience than the likes of Ride Along 2 or Dad's Army?
I know what you meant. I was just saying Cage played it better.