MovieChat Forums > acidraindrop > Replies
acidraindrop's Replies
It's definitely a movie about faith and hope. Caught me off guard, but that's honestly very much consistent with his previous films. I think I prefer this over the original ending.
The ending of the film is not open-ended like the book is. Full disclosure, I'm not a fan of the book, but I really appreciate what Shyamalan did here.
Fans of the book might be disappointed, because it changes the tone completely. I honestly appreciate the revision, and quite frankly, it's really consistent with some of the themes he often employs (Unbreakable, Signs, etc.)
That said, I'm not confirming what you wrote or not, in case you didn't want to be spoiled.
LMAO, gawddamnit, I'm stupid. haha I was looking forward to that still.
Agreed.
I mean, you can speculate about the weird dreams, the dog, who infected what, etc. But, it's not really worth watching again to talk about it XD
I know this is a niche perspective, but I loved it. I thought it was fascinating that they made such an intense thriller but giving the audience virtually no details about what's going on. neat concept
wait, so Heimdall is Jesus' father? I'm not quite following this interp.
"I didn't pull the trigger! It just happened"
lmao.
For reals. I used to laugh at disinfo conspiracy theories. But really, with all these cookie-cutter bait posts, I can't see it any other way. And if ppl aren't disinfo, they're definitely sheep or just mindless internet drones.
I miss the early days of the internet where posters seemed like real people. With real opinions. But ugh. Maybe that's just nostalgia goggles.
Also, since you only had a few comments, I checked your posts to see if you were another weird bot person or something. Glad to see that, even if I don't necessarily agree with everything you wrote, you appear to be a real person lmao. Instead of someone just checking off boxes when responding to other people.
Hmm, I don't think I've seen Hoult play a role where he would look intense enough to be Bruce Wayne/Batman.
I might change my tune with the new mission: impossible though; he's a villain right?
Dude, Oliver Jackson Cohen and Theo James would both have my vote. Cohen needs more opportunities to shine, and I hope he doesn't get typecast as a villain lmao
I think all of that is true, except Rita is not the light. The light is life itself.
Otherwise, he would have broken the cycle far earlier. He saw her worth way before he finally got to Feb 3.
So much of this website is left wing trolls arguing with right trolls.
It's like that fake meme story about undercover cops posing as drug dealers arresting undercover cops posing as drug dealers.
I think they're both terrible actors lol, so sorry.
but what if i wanna cosplay as new Velma! XD
It's funny. I actually think that as a society, people are far less imaginative now.
It's kinda strange to think about...a society less in touch with reality but simultaneously less creative.
It honestly doesn't ring true to me as a newer user on this site. I've seen some one-sided moderating myself, and I mean, there's still a record of someone writing "drop dead" every single day for four months in a particular thread, on a particular page. Despite reporting.
Yeah, sure I could ignore it. But it's disappointing to know that that sort of spam is acceptable. Especially because it doesn't influence the trending bar, even after blocking the user.
<blockquote>For me, I think the third film in the series should have started a bit closer to the end of TDK. Batman being actively hunted by the authorities is glossed over entirely.</blockquote>
It was disappointed to see Begins and TDK being sold as an early-career batman. But then with the release TDKR, it was clear, that's all Batman was. We never see those middle problems of Bruce's career, because in the nolanverse, it never happened. And yeah, I think it was Ledger's death that led to issues with the third chapter. And Nolan wanted a "final" story, that would preclude the possibility of a fourth movie. So we got this letdown of a conclusion.
Yeah, that caught me off guard when I watched the Gunn reveal. But maybe they wanna tackle something new. And if they're going for an experienced Bruce Wayne, then maybe we'll be seeing a Batman that's already gone through multiple Robins. Which is fine for me; I'm still disappointed we won't get to see the battle-hardened Batfleck, but maybe we'll still be getting a Batman that's been around the block.
Post-modern has a specific meaning in various fields, but yes, sometimes it's just extra words just chucked in.
Like the phrase "cultural marxism" itself is nonsense that a pseudo-intellectuals just keep repeating.
That poster above though, at a glance, seems to know what he's talking about. I don't fully agree with everything they said, on the mark.
Hell, I'm still confused why ppl are upset with Chris Pratt. Every attempt to cancel him seems like a stretch in logic.
Eternals really feels different from anything else in the MCU. A lot of ppl didn't like it, but I actually enjoyed it very much. Feels more of a slower-burn character drama compared to the spectacle popcorn films that make up the majority of the MCU.
It's a bit of a time investment, but just throwing that out there. I like MOST of the cast, and their interactions. It's still very much an epic superhero film, but I think it gets there differently than your typical one.