Jump to content

Unpopular Movie Opinions


JGPLX.

Recommended Posts

 

 

Emo Parker didn't bug me much, either. The issues I have with Spider-Man 3 is that it fails to juggle between all its villains and subplots, and the revelation that Marko Flint was involved in Uncle Ben's death, which felt forced and disingenuous.

 

Define modern cinema. What decades are you talking about?

Well, I see modern cinema as encompassing the past four decades or so, when the concept of blockbusters was introduced and movies started to influence pop culture.

 

I will admit that Spider-Man 3 is flawed, but it gets too much flak for a decent movie, at least in my opinion. I liked it more than the first installment.

Hmm, so you're including the mid/late-'70s then, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

 

"in this thread"

Don't see him post anywhere else, is it just as bad?

Yup, especially with anything Music-related. I still remember him saying Kanye West and OutKast have the only consistent discographies in Hip Hop history.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Underworld *censored*ing sucks man.

Never seen the movie.. but jesus christ man. Every single post of yours in this thread is you being a combative douche.

 

That's him everywhere, but he cries when he gets challenged on his views.

 

Underworld is still more entertaining than The Dark Knight, doesn't drag on for so freakin' long and has better action sequences. The Joker > The Dark Knight and Underworld though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing is the Jokers character is impossible so the stuff he does shoUldnt suprise you.

 

Also it's based off a comic book where you should take things with a pinch of salt. I watched Batman 3 last week and realised the whole blowing up ever bridge thing Is impossible, but it just works.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Underworld *censored*ing sucks man.

Never seen the movie.. but jesus christ man. Every single post of yours in this thread is you being a combative douche.

Just figured now?

Look a few posts above.. haha
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing is the Jokers character is impossible so the stuff he does shoUldnt suprise you.

 

Also it's based off a comic book where you should take things with a pinch of salt. I watched Batman 3 last week and realised the whole blowing up ever bridge thing Is impossible, but it just works.

 

Yeah but it's at the same time a reboot which very much tried to ground Batman in reality as much as possible. The major selling point of the movies and their success was that for the first time the characters are "real human beings". A relateable, realistic super hero movie. So at least some realistic plot is fair to expect. Ledger is great, but his role is shoddily written.

 

It's not that unrealistic stuff happens, I'm fine with that, but in Dark Knight it happens purely for the sake of the plot moving on and making Joker look good - it's not very good writing. It treats plot and big events like any other action movie, but gets praised as this masterful piece of cinema - that's what I have an issue with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Emo Parker didn't bug me much, either. The issues I have with Spider-Man 3 is that it fails to juggle between all its villains and subplots, and the revelation that Marko Flint was involved in Uncle Ben's death, which felt forced and disingenuous.

 

Define modern cinema. What decades are you talking about?

Well, I see modern cinema as encompassing the past four decades or so, when the concept of blockbusters was introduced and movies started to influence pop culture.

 

I will admit that Spider-Man 3 is flawed, but it gets too much flak for a decent movie, at least in my opinion. I liked it more than the first installment.

Hmm, so you're including the mid/late-'70s then, right?

 

 

Yeah, particularly because of movies such as Jaws, Alien and the Star Wars franchise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

Emo Parker didn't bug me much, either. The issues I have with Spider-Man 3 is that it fails to juggle between all its villains and subplots, and the revelation that Marko Flint was involved in Uncle Ben's death, which felt forced and disingenuous.

 

Define modern cinema. What decades are you talking about?

Well, I see modern cinema as encompassing the past four decades or so, when the concept of blockbusters was introduced and movies started to influence pop culture.

 

I will admit that Spider-Man 3 is flawed, but it gets too much flak for a decent movie, at least in my opinion. I liked it more than the first installment.

Hmm, so you're including the mid/late-'70s then, right?

Yeah, particularly because of movies such as Jaws, Alien and the Star Wars franchise.

All right, in that case I'm gonna have to go with 1975 being the best year in modern cinema. In '75, you have: Barry Lyndon, Dog Day Afternoon, Death Race 2000, Jaws, The Magic Flute, Monty Python and the Holy Grail, Nashville, One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, Picnic at Hanging Rock, and The Rocky Horror Picture Show. For me, 1999 just doesn't beat that, even though I agree with you that 1999 was a pretty darn good year (i.e. Being John Malkovich, Eyes Wide Shut, Fight Club, The Limey, Magnolia, Office Space, and The Straight Story).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I can understand why The Phantomenace, Attack of the Clones and Revenge of the Sith get grief, I still find them hella enjoyable... I grew up with those movies. Granted I seen the original trilogy first. I do love all the Star Wars movies probably more than any other film. The only things that come close to it are Back To The Future, Halloween, LOTR and Harry Potter. I always grew up a big Harry potter fan. I was obsessed as a kid. That's my childhood right there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only good thing about the new Star Wars trilogy is the special effects. The stories were pretty... bkapshsgsagh, to say the least. Also, *Censored* Harry Potter movies and everyone involved with changing shit around, removing important stuff and adding stupid stuff that made no sense. I'm still mad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only good thing about the new Star Wars trilogy is the special effects. The stories were pretty... bkapshsgsagh, to say the least.

The special effects don't even hold up anymore. Like they used green screen for literally everything and since CGI has improved so much in ten years it all looks like complete shit. Like the Kamino, droid factory, and malevolence scenes look insanely awful now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The only good thing about the new Star Wars trilogy is the special effects. The stories were pretty... bkapshsgsagh, to say the least.

The special effects don't even hold up anymore. Like they used green screen for literally everything and since CGI has improved so much in ten years it all looks like complete shit. Like the Kamino, droid factory, and malevolence scenes look insanely awful now.

 

I can get past all that, I just love the lightsabers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just went back and watched that whole fight. I didn't remember that movie as being so "classically Star Wars". It looked a lot more gritty and whatnot than I remembered. I remembered it as a more modern film with cleaner effects...but in watching it now, it definitely still had that Star Wars look to it, IMO. The effects didn't look like 1999-2000 effects.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...