MovieChat Forums > abigolcwock > Replies
abigolcwock's Replies
because they made it pg13. That's literally the point of the post dumbo
eh, would've said the same till the latest BCS episode.
it's a bad argument because it doesn't make sense. When people talk about realism, they mean that they want it to be consistent within the world it has set up. If time travel showed up in NCFOM out of nowhere, your argument would be valid. But if it's set up properly, it isn't.
there are a bunch of good child performances. Haley Joel Osment and Macaulay Culkin gave excellent performances in mainstream movies, and any kid in any Haneke movie is good. Half the cast in The White Ribbon is children, and all do great because Haneke auditioned hundreds and selected the absolute best. But he's also a great director, which is really important when a child is doing their first ever movie. The fact that actors like Samuel L. Jackson and Natalie Portman are awful in the prequels should be proof enough that Lloyd deserves none of the criticism he gets.
I use those 2 actors as examples as they are both very director dependent. Natalie Portman can give a great performance but not by herself. And George is famous for being an awful director, so put 2 and 2 together. Don't give him too much credit for New Hope either. He came up with the premise and went through the terrible ordeal that was making it in the first place, but he is not the reason that it and Empire are so great.
RotJ being meh and the prequels being terrible movies should be proof enough that he is a hack.
Same there. Unless the person is drunk or something of course
what's the point of punishing someone for an accident?
What's the point when it's an accident? Seriously?
kys
the fact that the filmmakers did not take it into consideration is an oversight imo. There should at least have been a throwaway line. My post gives a really good suggestion that doesn't change the movie at all
The fact that it wasn't brought up by the movie at all is a minor flaw imo
I don't have much too add, except to just say that this is probably the best Moviechat thread that I have seen in years
https://www.circeinstitute.org/sites/default/files/styles/blog_full/public/field/image/blog_post/actually.png?itok=zCZbcaBi
do you look like this person? Please just be honest with me if you do
how do you even type in such a squarish format btw? But the reason I called you a retard, and am calling you one again, is because you are not actually answering my question. I am aware about the recent stuff with him, but it has absolutely no bearing on the question I'm asking, so you're reply is redundant. The reply by Kowalski was exactly what I was looking for, yours is not. Maybe you can learn something from him.
Thanks, this answers my question :)
this movie is from 2014, retard. But damn, really disappointed with the responses on this thread in retrospect as it is a pretty interesting question. Why the hell wasn't James Franco in this one, does anyone know? I would love if someone with an actual answer would chime in on this.
And sorry for singling you out of you 3, as all 3 of you are just as useless, but it's just because your response was the most recent one.
All good
I don't even remember writing this comment, but I also don't really get your reply? Not sure if I wrote it after or before watching it, but either way, I'll tell you that's it's a pretty awesome movie and one of the better ones from the past few years.
didn't get any of that. Didn't think it was anything special, just kind of a run of the mill Netflix show, and it being a girl is just a gimmick, not something to get upset over.
Because she's besting men?
How is it revisionist if all the characters and story are fictional?