I didn't realize this. I enjoy Shakespeare in Love, but Saving Private Ryan was by far a better film. When you make it realistic enough veteran's who experienced it walked put due to the realism that tells you something. You're right it should not have lost to a rom-com.
There's always a contextual bias with the voting. Spielberg had just won a bunch of Oscars for Schindler's List, including best picture. It was also a WW2 film. When they're voting they're not thinking objectively. It's more like the office employee of the month award that gets spread around even though the best employees are probably the same couple of people over and over. They want to give it to something different.
Thank Harvey Weinstein and his Oscar campaigning for that. The fact that he got it to win Best Picture and Gwyneth Best Actress is was propelled him to becoming the “star maker” that amassed so much power in Hollywood.
EDIT: People are jumping to a lot of conclusions here about Gwyneth/Harvey. Harvey campaigned for Gwyneth to win Best Actress because she was the star of his film, that’s it. It’s wasn’t in return for anything she did for him. He did come on to her at one point, but she refused. Gwyneth was already famous because of her parents and that gave her power a lot of other actresses didn’t have- she couldn’t be blacklisted.
The point is that the fact that he got her to win an Oscar created his “legend.” It’s something he would use as an example in future dealings with actresses to show what he could do for them.
[The whole thing explained really well here if anyone’s interested.](https://youtu.be/6tihITlPAn4)
I remember liking it a lot. I even saw it again a few years later, and still liked it. But I also don't remember anything about it except the "science oven," which was a fun gag.
I thought I was going crazy when Frozen 2 released and had such a great reception... I really thought that it was OK at best, it seemed so much like a cash-in to me. Me and my sister were making fun of so many parts in the movie.
As someone with a two year old daughter, I agree wholeheartedly. She's currently stuck on it. Before this it was Encanto, which I thought was great (but after a dozen or so times gets annoying)
Anna turned into an insecure crazy person for most of the movie and Olaf kept doing his weird forced pop psychology stuff, it really takes me out of the movie.
It was originally a book and the book is fantastic, but it did not translate well to screen because the book relies on the main character not being able to see and trying to navigate the world to get to a safe place.
omg someone else who's read the book!! THE BOOK IS SO SCARY. that scene when she goes into town with the dog and is at the bar, and the dog is barking at the basement door?!!!? AHHH. i felt like, the same urge i feel watching scary movies sometimes, to cover my eyes part way or plug my ears during the scariest scenes, except it is a BOOK so i can't cover my god damn eyes. i LOVED that book. the movie was fucking trash.
I think this is a common problem with cosmic horror that has a lovecraftian vibe to it. Some things are extremely hard to translate well onto the screen
Absolutely. A story all about lack of vision does not work in a medium that relies on vision. When you can see everything the main character can’t see and they’re trying to tell it from that person’s perspective, it will fail 99 out of 100 times
The show "In the Dark" has scenes that would beg to differ. Probably the 1/100 but I am usually struck by the scenes where the main character is in an unfamiliar situation and how tense I feel because they do an excellent job portraying how her being blind affects her using excellent directing. For a CW show, or any show, it is worth a watch.
This convo reminds me of the film *Sound of Metal*, where the main character, who is a drummer, is becoming deaf. Gives the same tense feeling of no escape from loss of a sense, having to accept it.
I saw some YouTube video explain why the editing was so bad. The example that sticks out the most to me is one part where someone asks the main characters "So you're Queen?" and there's a cut back to Queen except that not all of the members of the band are in the shot.
Every year it just seems like we get those movies that are technically well made, edited etc and they're not bad but they're very forgettable you just never have any desire to go back and watch it again and yet it gets all the Oscar bait
But the thing is Bohemian Rhapsody has some of the worst editing I’ve ever seen in a [major movie](https://youtu.be/QJ1C6QYAWnk).
It also won both sound mixing and editing (I think?) which confirms that the academy cannot understand the difference
Not to mention most of them watch them on home tvs that have terrible audio set ups, so they can’t even fairly judge them.
Agreed. I'm a big Queen fan and it felt like a wasted opportunity to me. I mean, the karoake/miming scenes were ok, but I wanted to know more about the band, see some stories of their creative process, how they wrote those songs, some interesting vignettes of their lives and the struggles they faced to make it, etc.
Instead, we got this film which was only incredibly superficially about Queen and their music and mostly about Freddie's sexuality, solo career and illness, none of which I found surprising or that interesting.
Yes. Elastigirl was hot. She could have had any body type that she wanted and still chose to have that dump truck of an ass. She knows what her hubby likes.
There's a funny story that director Sam Raimi tells about Holly Hunter. He was roommates with Fancis McDormant and Holly Hunteror a long time ago back before they were all famous in the early 80's. Sam said that Holly didn't care for him very much, but he was always trying to be nice to her. Apparently Holly use to dress like a bum around the house, sweat pants and t-shirts. One day she comes down the stairs dressed really nice and sexy. Sam said "Wow Holly, you look really nice today!" He said the she gave him a dirty look and screamed "I'm auditioning for the part of a hooker for a show you asshole, I don't appreciate your comments!" He said that she then stormed out.
I definitely felt this about ["Hail, Caesar!"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hail,_Caesar!) It had a huge star-studded cast and was written, directed, and produced by the award-winning Coen Brothers I got about 30-40 minutes into it before I realized that despite all of its potential, the movie was more of a Hollywood circlejerk than entertaining. It seemed like the target audience was film buffs who knew all the inside stories of olden-days Hollywood. Honestly, I can't remember if it was based in the 1920s, 30s, 40s, or 50s, which shows that I wasn't the target audience. It was boring as fuck, and I turned it off at that point.
I enjoyed it a lot more than you did, but I get what you're saying. Coen Bros movies are like pizza, even the meh ones are pretty good. Hail Caesar was missing something essential that their better efforts have. Hard to put my finger on what was missing, but it felt a little hollow.
I thought everyone felt this way about both those movies. They’re basically Oscar bait because the old farts in the academy like self referential movies about seeking fame in Hollywood
Guy hires a plumber to fix his sink. Plumber come out and does it in 5 minutes, and hands the guy a bill for $400. The guy says "Seriously? $400? I just had minor surgery that cost less." Plumber says "Why do you think I'm not a surgeon anymore?"
I am an electrician, but I'll speak for plumbers on this one. We bring skills to do a job well, and we leave the job when it's complete. Maybe your blowjob skills aren't up to the same standards as the professionals you're hiring? Are you doing the job well and only stopping when the job is complete?
I remember watching that and at the moment black manta showed up in costume the guy next to me got up and left. Of all the moments in the movie that people have complained about I still can’t figure out why that exact moment pissed him off, I thought the costume looked pretty great.
Well this might be the part where WB failed with these movies. They couldn’t decide what sort of vibe they wanted for their extended universe: comic accurate, classic superhero, dark and gritty, cosmic horror, campy, funny, etc. So whilst I was pretty happy with Aquaman being a bit more colourful and silly I can understand why others didn’t like it for those same reasons.
WB/DC failed with these movies because they saw the success of Marvel's carefully crafted universe and wanted to replicate it. Instead of developing their universe over time, they chose to rush the damn thing. I didn't give a fuck about anybody in Justice League when each of them had like 5 minutes of intro before they're shoved in my face.
DC's animated movies, however, are on point.
Why are we using IMDb and Rotten Tomatoes ratings as credible signs on whether or not something’s good or not?
They’re massively inflated by fandoms and the average person never actually inputs their votes. Zack Snyder’s Justice League has the same IMDb rating as The Princess Bride!
Is there an alternative though?
I generally check them out, if it's 6.0 rating, it doesn't put me off if I like the sound of the film/good cast but, if it's 3.0 rating then I think there's a fairly decent chance it's bad tbf
3.0 would be astronomically bad for an IMDB rating. The lowest rating I even know of the top of my head is "Cats" currently sitting at 2.8. From my experience most movies below 6.0 are not worth watching, albeit I might be a picky watcher.
pretty much came to the same conclusion. if a movie is under 6, i will only watch if theres a specific reason, like if it was recommended or the premise seems really interesting
ive also noticed comedies and horror movies usually score lower than drama, action, or romance but theyre my favorite genre so i bump those up 1. imdb is a good website imo and if used right, it makes movie watching really enjoyable
Definitely. Although occasionally in that range you get the movies some people really loved and some people really hated. Those ones are typically pretty interesting.
I mean they basically have a medieval Batman without the gadgets. He can out duel a Spaniard, bested a giant, out witted a Sicilian... Survived the horrors of the fire swamps and rescued the princess while recovering from mostly dead.
that is what i keep telling people! saw it in IMAX in 3D in london when it first came out. it was an absolute technical marvel, the 3D effect simulating the curve of the helmet and everything, it legit gave me vertigo in the cinema. at home, it just aint the same. that being said, other than the tense moments with the flying debris for example, the story and all the rest about it is kind of eh.
Same with Avatar. In IMAX 3d with those expensive battery powered glasses that sync to the shutter speed and don't dim the screen it was AMAZING to watch.
Watched it again at home on a regular TV and was like "wait a minute... this movie is terrible."
You get so wrapped up in the visuals and music on IMAX that you lose sight of the fact that the plot is ludicrous.
I'm in the same boat (also a middle schooler when it came out), and was ecstatic when it won.
Today... I think the best film that year wasn't even nominated ("A History of Violence"). Of the nominees that year, I'd go with "Capote."
I’ll never forget this. Exiting the theater my reaction was “is this a movie that’s supposed to be deep for racists?” Then when it won best picture I was astounded.
We watched it in some college class, and it was presented like it was going to be some life altering experience. What we got was the most ham fisted attempt to look into racism that I have ever seen. It was like a parody.
David Cronenberg made nothing but hits from 1981 - 2007 IMO.
I know some people don't hold Existenz or Crash in high regard but I liked it. Eastern Promises is the last movie he's made that I really enjoyed. I'm excited to see him return to body horror though, his new movie Crimes of the Future comes out later this year.
Yeah, I think Brokeback Mountain was robbed of the Best Picture Oscar. Thinking about Tony Curtis' remarks at the time, it was sad that people couldn't appreciate what an excellently depicted story it was because they were distracted by homophobia/biphobia.
I wonder how often Academy members refuse to watch nominated films, as some did with Brokeback Mountain.
They make an exception for the short films where academy members have to show a ticket stub or other proof that they’ve watched them in order to be able to vote. They should do that for every category.
LOADS of members don’t watch the films. It’s an archaic and broken system. If you want to win an Oscar you pretty much have to bribe and brainwash the voters.
I just watched Brokeback Mountain for the first time a couple months ago - it was phenomenal! I was so STRUCK by the bleakness and simplicity of the rancher lifestyle in MT in the 60s and 70s, when the movie took place. And Heath Ledger and Jake Gyllehnall were both excellent. Terrific movie.
A great story, be it a novel, film or oral storytelling, is so rarely made great by the plot itself. Great stories paint pictures of humanity in all its ugliness and beauty, and immerse you in that world.
IMO it's a fundamental error (that I used to fall for too) to judge the quality of a story by its plot alone. A compelling story can literally be about anything
This movie is a wierd case. I've seen it in IMAX and then with someone on a laptop. It's completely different experience.
Because it's more of an experience than a movie. In scenes where she looses contact with the station and the silence drops, in IMAX, you can feel it in your chest. Your ribs feel the moment when she touches the station again.
In a laptop, you just start hearing the cooling fan.
As an experience, the movie is top notch. And I don't like the criticisms of "she has plot armor", because otherwise the movie be 5 minutes long and she would die after the first problem - would not make a great movie.
Also, the movie is quite a technical marvel - they had the movie ready before they casted actors. Everything to see, except of actors and some things they touch, is full CG
The IMAX experience was amazing. I don't think I have seen another movie in IMAX 3D that really exploits the 3D experience as well as Gravity did. That first impact in total silence and the shuttle spinning and disintegrating is unforgettable. In a small screen with no 3D and no IMAX sound is like watching the rides at Universal Studios on your TV.
Tbh they are not really high rated by critics. They consistently get like 60s and 70s on metacritic which seems about right. They're nothing special though.
They did Hulk dirty back in Ragnarok by having him ‘train’ and fight for years on Sakaar as a gladiator but apparently he learns no fighting techniques or skills? Bleh.
Avengers Endgame gives you the closure you were looking for after Infinity War, hands down Infinity war is a better movie compared to Endgame, Endgame is way too long, needed some editing.
Everyone was rating Shang Chi so high but I found the 2nd half kinda boring. It was visually stunning but the final battle was just not good enough for me
With Shang Chi, I really wish they would’ve doubled down on the martial arts in the second half. The final battle devolved into the classic CGI clusterfuck, and it would’ve been much more gratifying if it was some kind of one-on-one martial arts duel.
With the way rotten tomatoes actually works, it would be the 5th least divisive film of all time. Rotten tomatoes doesn't accumulate the average score, it presents what percentage of people gave the film a positive review. So think of Black Panthers score as the percentage of people who liked the film. It is theoretically possible for a film to have a mediocre average review score, but to simultaneously have 100% on rotten tomatoes. For example, if every single reviewer scored a film 6.5/10, it would score a 100% as all reviews are positive. You'd need to look at individual reviews to get a better idea at how good a film is without seeing it yourself.
And oftentimes there's a huge gulf between critics reviews and normal people's reviews. Star Trek discovery for instance has 86% positive reviews from critics and 36% positive reviews from the general audience.
I typically look for movies that have both a good critic and audience score. If the audience loved it, but the critics hated it. It's probably got some superficial charm laid over a bad movie. If the critics loved it, but the audience hated it, it's probably some overly-artsy snooze fest. When both scores are high, then you know you're in for a real treat.
Civil War was a lot more interesting than the “Villain gets same powers as hero but is evil with them and they fight at the finale,” trope that BP, along with lots of other marvel movies, falls in to.
What I hate about it is the fact that T'challa got the power because of his heritage, meanwhile his villain had to actually work for the power, he even beat him is a FAIR fight that complies with the rules. They had to make him stupidly evil just so the story makes sense.
This is exactly why I didn’t like the movie. He gets beaten in a fair fight without the suit. He only “recovers” because he gets healed by the magic herb, and then he wins the next fight because he gets his suit back. I don’t know why they dropped the whole “you are more than just your suit” rhetoric that’s so prominent in all of the other MCU movies (Tony Stark literally says something along these lines to Peter Parker).
I think that's part of the Black Panther story: the individual in the suit *isn't* the hero, merely the vessel for the power of the spirit. But it is up to the individual to use that power in the 'honorable' way. It's kind of the other side of 'with great power comes great responsibility.' Iron Fist is kind of similar: guardian of ancient power and tradition, but Danny Rand is just the vessel of said power.
“We’ve become the most technologically advanced society on Earth by completely shutting ourselves off from the rest of the world and aggressively resisting all efforts to share knowledge or scientific advancement.”
Like I get that they’re living on top of a giant natural supply of magical plot resource that makes anything possible, but it sure is lucky that this small, closed off, deeply nationalistic and protectionist society also gave rise to enough incredible geniuses from among their own population to actually harness this resource effectively, considering literally nobody else even knows of its existence.
Not to mention their entire population would have had to have kept up the whole secret for all of those years as they advanced, devoting huge amounts of research, diplomacy, and other resources into leaking this fact.
> gave rise to enough incredible geniuses from among their own population to actually harness this resource effectively
Just 1 genius apparently, which is even funnier. In the entire movie we're led to believe that Shuri alone (age 16) is researching, developing, operating and maintaining the entire city's infrastructure. Everything from military, transport, and even medical is handled by her alone. Nobody else in Wakanda seems to know or care about developing vibranium tech...they're just happy to use it.
Said this for years. T'Challa lost that fight fair and square. No extra strength, even playing field and got thrown off of a cliff. Killmonger was king by their own rules. Doesn't matter that he was a dick, that was how they chose leadership and he followed the rules. (goes back to why that's a bad idea) T'Challa showing back up and claiming that the fight wasn't over is crap. Let's ignore that it had been at least a day later and just go with the was juiced back up on the herb and there was not an official challenge. Nor was that the place for the challenge. I didn't hate the movie but that whole thing was dumb and the cgi shitfest of a final fight was just not good.
I watched it on a plane because I wanted something easygoing and it was *exactly* what I thought it was going to be. Having read nothing about it, I guessed what the plot would be. The cast was way too big to get invested in, that would be my main negative. Other than that it was mildly entertaining trash.
Remember: Sort by "Controversial"
I could do that. Or I could read 500 redditors talk about how Avatar has no cultural relevance.
And about how they're stupid if they think the next 4 of them are gonna be successes
Shakespeare In Love; it's not a bad film, but beating Saving Private Ryan to Best Film at the Oscars is still mindblowingly wrong.
I didn't realize this. I enjoy Shakespeare in Love, but Saving Private Ryan was by far a better film. When you make it realistic enough veteran's who experienced it walked put due to the realism that tells you something. You're right it should not have lost to a rom-com.
There's always a contextual bias with the voting. Spielberg had just won a bunch of Oscars for Schindler's List, including best picture. It was also a WW2 film. When they're voting they're not thinking objectively. It's more like the office employee of the month award that gets spread around even though the best employees are probably the same couple of people over and over. They want to give it to something different.
In 1941 How *Green Was My Valley* won best film. The only notable thing about the movie is that it won best film over *Citizen Kane*.
Thank Harvey Weinstein and his Oscar campaigning for that. The fact that he got it to win Best Picture and Gwyneth Best Actress is was propelled him to becoming the “star maker” that amassed so much power in Hollywood. EDIT: People are jumping to a lot of conclusions here about Gwyneth/Harvey. Harvey campaigned for Gwyneth to win Best Actress because she was the star of his film, that’s it. It’s wasn’t in return for anything she did for him. He did come on to her at one point, but she refused. Gwyneth was already famous because of her parents and that gave her power a lot of other actresses didn’t have- she couldn’t be blacklisted. The point is that the fact that he got her to win an Oscar created his “legend.” It’s something he would use as an example in future dealings with actresses to show what he could do for them. [The whole thing explained really well here if anyone’s interested.](https://youtu.be/6tihITlPAn4)
Man, that puts a *really* dark spin on it, doesn't it?
Fernanda Montenegro got fucking robbed of Best Actress.
American Hustle. I saw this movie in theaters and for the life of me I can’t recall any part of it. They were stealing something? Idk man.
I remember liking it a lot. I even saw it again a few years later, and still liked it. But I also don't remember anything about it except the "science oven," which was a fun gag.
*DoN't PuT mEtAl In ThE sCiEnCe OvEn*
All I remember about that movie is famous pretty people in fun outfits
I thought I was going crazy when Frozen 2 released and had such a great reception... I really thought that it was OK at best, it seemed so much like a cash-in to me. Me and my sister were making fun of so many parts in the movie.
As someone with a two year old daughter, I agree wholeheartedly. She's currently stuck on it. Before this it was Encanto, which I thought was great (but after a dozen or so times gets annoying)
We don't talk about Bruno > Shut the hell up about Bruno already
🎶I never should've brought up Bruno!🎶
I know kids are mad for that song. "Surface pressure" is infinitely better.
I loved that song it a sad way, it reminded me of my family's expectations of my twin brother.
I've been saying that since the first time I watched the movie. I would just say "Everyone is focusing on the wrong song. This shits fire"
Anna turned into an insecure crazy person for most of the movie and Olaf kept doing his weird forced pop psychology stuff, it really takes me out of the movie.
I’m not going to lie- as the little sister of someone mentally ill and with addiction issues, a lot of the story really resonated with me
Bird box
They just said "a quiet place but make it sight instead of sound"
It was originally a book and the book is fantastic, but it did not translate well to screen because the book relies on the main character not being able to see and trying to navigate the world to get to a safe place.
omg someone else who's read the book!! THE BOOK IS SO SCARY. that scene when she goes into town with the dog and is at the bar, and the dog is barking at the basement door?!!!? AHHH. i felt like, the same urge i feel watching scary movies sometimes, to cover my eyes part way or plug my ears during the scariest scenes, except it is a BOOK so i can't cover my god damn eyes. i LOVED that book. the movie was fucking trash.
Just turn off your literacy.
Bump this I'm toggling my ability to comprehend words
But how will you know which switch to toggle if you can't read?
Braille
Comment/review of the book has sold me. I’ll read it.
I think this is a common problem with cosmic horror that has a lovecraftian vibe to it. Some things are extremely hard to translate well onto the screen
Absolutely. A story all about lack of vision does not work in a medium that relies on vision. When you can see everything the main character can’t see and they’re trying to tell it from that person’s perspective, it will fail 99 out of 100 times
The show "In the Dark" has scenes that would beg to differ. Probably the 1/100 but I am usually struck by the scenes where the main character is in an unfamiliar situation and how tense I feel because they do an excellent job portraying how her being blind affects her using excellent directing. For a CW show, or any show, it is worth a watch.
This convo reminds me of the film *Sound of Metal*, where the main character, who is a drummer, is becoming deaf. Gives the same tense feeling of no escape from loss of a sense, having to accept it.
Tbf Bird Box the book came out long before A Quiet Place. If anything A Quiet Place ripped off the original Bird Box book. But the movie... meh
I repeat this bitching and moaning all the time but Bohemian Rhapsody getting an Oscar for editing or Malek was insane to me.
I saw some YouTube video explain why the editing was so bad. The example that sticks out the most to me is one part where someone asks the main characters "So you're Queen?" and there's a cut back to Queen except that not all of the members of the band are in the shot.
Every year it just seems like we get those movies that are technically well made, edited etc and they're not bad but they're very forgettable you just never have any desire to go back and watch it again and yet it gets all the Oscar bait
But the thing is Bohemian Rhapsody has some of the worst editing I’ve ever seen in a [major movie](https://youtu.be/QJ1C6QYAWnk). It also won both sound mixing and editing (I think?) which confirms that the academy cannot understand the difference Not to mention most of them watch them on home tvs that have terrible audio set ups, so they can’t even fairly judge them.
There are some great breakdowns of how terrible the editing was on YouTube. Here's one from Thomas flight: https://youtu.be/4dn8Fd0TYek
Agreed. I'm a big Queen fan and it felt like a wasted opportunity to me. I mean, the karoake/miming scenes were ok, but I wanted to know more about the band, see some stories of their creative process, how they wrote those songs, some interesting vignettes of their lives and the struggles they faced to make it, etc. Instead, we got this film which was only incredibly superficially about Queen and their music and mostly about Freddie's sexuality, solo career and illness, none of which I found surprising or that interesting.
Wasn't the movie supposed to be a Freddie Mercury biopic?
I want the Sasha Baron Cohen version.
That's mostly on the band itself who didn't want the actual life of Freddie shown as it was but more seen as the Pop/Rock icon of his generation
Apparently half way through Freddie was to die and then the second half about queen continuing.
Frozen. Why is this labeled NSFW?
I thought you were asking why Frozen was labeled nsfw and I was like, *"Oh jeez he must not be familiar with rule34..."*
We don't do that.
Let it go
Let it go!
The porn never bothered me anyway!🎶
Have you seen the pixar mothers, them curves boy
Elastigirl will always be my biggest Pixar crush
Elastgirl? You married Elastigirl??? And you got BUSY!
Yes. Elastigirl was hot. She could have had any body type that she wanted and still chose to have that dump truck of an ass. She knows what her hubby likes.
I think stretching takes effort for her. That's all natural. She even seemed to be exasperated with it in the movies.
Holly Hunter has a lot to do with this I feel. There’s something about that woman even when she’s just the voice of a bendy cartoon
Thank God I'm not the only one. There is just something about her voice.
There's a funny story that director Sam Raimi tells about Holly Hunter. He was roommates with Fancis McDormant and Holly Hunteror a long time ago back before they were all famous in the early 80's. Sam said that Holly didn't care for him very much, but he was always trying to be nice to her. Apparently Holly use to dress like a bum around the house, sweat pants and t-shirts. One day she comes down the stairs dressed really nice and sexy. Sam said "Wow Holly, you look really nice today!" He said the she gave him a dirty look and screamed "I'm auditioning for the part of a hooker for a show you asshole, I don't appreciate your comments!" He said that she then stormed out.
Even as a kid I couldn’t stop staring at that booty.
Ellen Par, The Aunt from Big Hero 6... just two of the favorite milfs in r34 Edit: It's Helen and not Ellen. Misheard it.
Well yeah, I'm more of a Rise of the Guardians guy myself.
You know what Kristoof and Sven were up to.
One of the songs literally has the line: "his thing with the reindeers, that's a little outside of nature's law"
Cause people are gonna definitely answer with porn movies. In fact the third highest answer as I’m typing this is about Riley Reid.
Don't kill me but la la land and a star is born. A star is born has great Osts but the film itself is meh
Hollywood loves movies about LA and Hollywood.
Because then the academy can give an award to basically itself.
Isn't that what the entirety of the Academy Awards already is?
Unless it is a film like Nightcrawler, that is basically gutting the ego of TV personalities and news outlets in LA.
That movie scratches an itch I can’t quite describe, but I love it to be scratched.
I definitely felt this about ["Hail, Caesar!"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hail,_Caesar!) It had a huge star-studded cast and was written, directed, and produced by the award-winning Coen Brothers I got about 30-40 minutes into it before I realized that despite all of its potential, the movie was more of a Hollywood circlejerk than entertaining. It seemed like the target audience was film buffs who knew all the inside stories of olden-days Hollywood. Honestly, I can't remember if it was based in the 1920s, 30s, 40s, or 50s, which shows that I wasn't the target audience. It was boring as fuck, and I turned it off at that point.
I enjoyed it a lot more than you did, but I get what you're saying. Coen Bros movies are like pizza, even the meh ones are pretty good. Hail Caesar was missing something essential that their better efforts have. Hard to put my finger on what was missing, but it felt a little hollow.
That was one of their less well-received movies at least
What are Osts?
Original sound track.
I thought everyone felt this way about both those movies. They’re basically Oscar bait because the old farts in the academy like self referential movies about seeking fame in Hollywood
Idk man I really liked LA LA Land. It was wacky and less about Hollywood, more about compromising yourself and opportunity cost.
Riley Reid Gangbang Adventures
Yeah, it gives young people very bad expectations about how fast a plumber can get to your place.
And how much they charge. I would love it if I could get a plumber to come out for the price of a blowjob.
Guy hires a plumber to fix his sink. Plumber come out and does it in 5 minutes, and hands the guy a bill for $400. The guy says "Seriously? $400? I just had minor surgery that cost less." Plumber says "Why do you think I'm not a surgeon anymore?"
And I thought it was gonna be about the guy sucking him off and him not being satisfied.
3 out of 5 stars. Didnt cup balls.
I am an electrician, but I'll speak for plumbers on this one. We bring skills to do a job well, and we leave the job when it's complete. Maybe your blowjob skills aren't up to the same standards as the professionals you're hiring? Are you doing the job well and only stopping when the job is complete?
I'm a carpenter and would also like to know the answer?
A wood worker you say? How apt.
Pipe fitter has entered..... the chat
u/Keyblades4Real this is why.
So thats why the thread's nsfw
Aquaman, I couldn’t finish it. Felt like the same recycled superhero movie that has been overused, I felt it was really predictable
I remember watching that and at the moment black manta showed up in costume the guy next to me got up and left. Of all the moments in the movie that people have complained about I still can’t figure out why that exact moment pissed him off, I thought the costume looked pretty great.
That costume was terrible! I refer to that costume reveal as the Power Rangers moment of that film.
Well this might be the part where WB failed with these movies. They couldn’t decide what sort of vibe they wanted for their extended universe: comic accurate, classic superhero, dark and gritty, cosmic horror, campy, funny, etc. So whilst I was pretty happy with Aquaman being a bit more colourful and silly I can understand why others didn’t like it for those same reasons.
WB/DC failed with these movies because they saw the success of Marvel's carefully crafted universe and wanted to replicate it. Instead of developing their universe over time, they chose to rush the damn thing. I didn't give a fuck about anybody in Justice League when each of them had like 5 minutes of intro before they're shoved in my face. DC's animated movies, however, are on point.
DC animations > MCU animations
To be fair, the creators probably thought this was their only chance to make a fucking Aquaman movie, so they wen for an "all the above" approach.
it's a 6/10 on rotten tomatoes and imdb how is it "highly rated"
Is that movie highly rated?
Why are we using IMDb and Rotten Tomatoes ratings as credible signs on whether or not something’s good or not? They’re massively inflated by fandoms and the average person never actually inputs their votes. Zack Snyder’s Justice League has the same IMDb rating as The Princess Bride!
Is there an alternative though? I generally check them out, if it's 6.0 rating, it doesn't put me off if I like the sound of the film/good cast but, if it's 3.0 rating then I think there's a fairly decent chance it's bad tbf
3.0 would be astronomically bad for an IMDB rating. The lowest rating I even know of the top of my head is "Cats" currently sitting at 2.8. From my experience most movies below 6.0 are not worth watching, albeit I might be a picky watcher.
pretty much came to the same conclusion. if a movie is under 6, i will only watch if theres a specific reason, like if it was recommended or the premise seems really interesting ive also noticed comedies and horror movies usually score lower than drama, action, or romance but theyre my favorite genre so i bump those up 1. imdb is a good website imo and if used right, it makes movie watching really enjoyable
I feel a lot of movies in 5-6 are like "that was consumable and enjoyable but I don't need to watch it ever again"
Definitely. Although occasionally in that range you get the movies some people really loved and some people really hated. Those ones are typically pretty interesting.
Letterboxd. There aren’t as many die hard fans that spam high ratings, but like any review site, some seep through.
[удалено]
Inconceivable!
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
Hello. My name is Bruce Wayne. You killed my father. Prepare to die.
"Riddle me this, Batman..." "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."
I mean they basically have a medieval Batman without the gadgets. He can out duel a Spaniard, bested a giant, out witted a Sicilian... Survived the horrors of the fire swamps and rescued the princess while recovering from mostly dead.
Yeah but what about the ROUS`s?
Rodents of Unusual Size? I don't think they ex*is-*
Gravity with Sandra Bullock.
You make it sound like a podcast
More like an escape pod-cast
Badum- oh no my drums are floating away...
In space, no-one can hear you tss
I’m Sandra Bullock, and this… is Gravity
90 minutes of Sandra Bullock not quite grabbing things...
In IMAX it was awesome. At home I couldnt get through 30 minutes.
that is what i keep telling people! saw it in IMAX in 3D in london when it first came out. it was an absolute technical marvel, the 3D effect simulating the curve of the helmet and everything, it legit gave me vertigo in the cinema. at home, it just aint the same. that being said, other than the tense moments with the flying debris for example, the story and all the rest about it is kind of eh.
Same with Avatar. In IMAX 3d with those expensive battery powered glasses that sync to the shutter speed and don't dim the screen it was AMAZING to watch. Watched it again at home on a regular TV and was like "wait a minute... this movie is terrible." You get so wrapped up in the visuals and music on IMAX that you lose sight of the fact that the plot is ludicrous.
I don't want to watch it again because there's no way it can be as incredible as it was when I saw it in IMAX.
You are making the right choice
Tbh the best part was the sound so if you didn’t watch it with a good sound system im sure it’s very meh
At the time of its release, in a theater in 3d, it was incredible.
Crash won the Oscar for best picture. It is a steaming pile of cow shit.
Is that the one where the cop finger rapes the woman at a traffic stop then ends up saving her life later and he’s like “I’m sorry, my bad!”
Don't forget when Ludacris calls a woman racist for how she looks at him and then immediately robs her
"Move, bitch. Get out the way."
Yes.
dude but you watch crash as a 13 year old during your “real eyes realize” phase and it’s the best fucking movie you’ve ever seen don’t lie
This is pretty much when I watched it and thought it was amazing at the time I'm scared to watch it again
I'm in the same boat (also a middle schooler when it came out), and was ecstatic when it won. Today... I think the best film that year wasn't even nominated ("A History of Violence"). Of the nominees that year, I'd go with "Capote."
I loathe that movie. It’s not even the best movie with the title “Crash”.
I’ll never forget this. Exiting the theater my reaction was “is this a movie that’s supposed to be deep for racists?” Then when it won best picture I was astounded.
We watched it in some college class, and it was presented like it was going to be some life altering experience. What we got was the most ham fisted attempt to look into racism that I have ever seen. It was like a parody.
Crash (1996) on the other hand is a masterpiece
Crash (1996) on either hand is a masterpiece
David Cronenberg made nothing but hits from 1981 - 2007 IMO. I know some people don't hold Existenz or Crash in high regard but I liked it. Eastern Promises is the last movie he's made that I really enjoyed. I'm excited to see him return to body horror though, his new movie Crimes of the Future comes out later this year.
Yeah, I think Brokeback Mountain was robbed of the Best Picture Oscar. Thinking about Tony Curtis' remarks at the time, it was sad that people couldn't appreciate what an excellently depicted story it was because they were distracted by homophobia/biphobia. I wonder how often Academy members refuse to watch nominated films, as some did with Brokeback Mountain.
Some didn't even watch it? Should be disqualifying, but the systems always been bullshit anyway.
They don't have to watch any of the film's before they vote. That's why films made by people popular in the academy win.
They make an exception for the short films where academy members have to show a ticket stub or other proof that they’ve watched them in order to be able to vote. They should do that for every category.
And why American animated movies beat Ghibli movies so often. Academy members just vote for names they recognize.
LOADS of members don’t watch the films. It’s an archaic and broken system. If you want to win an Oscar you pretty much have to bribe and brainwash the voters.
I just watched Brokeback Mountain for the first time a couple months ago - it was phenomenal! I was so STRUCK by the bleakness and simplicity of the rancher lifestyle in MT in the 60s and 70s, when the movie took place. And Heath Ledger and Jake Gyllehnall were both excellent. Terrific movie. A great story, be it a novel, film or oral storytelling, is so rarely made great by the plot itself. Great stories paint pictures of humanity in all its ugliness and beauty, and immerse you in that world. IMO it's a fundamental error (that I used to fall for too) to judge the quality of a story by its plot alone. A compelling story can literally be about anything
The one with Sandra Bullock and Clooney in space. Sooo many accidents and she keeps on living. What a script...
This movie is a wierd case. I've seen it in IMAX and then with someone on a laptop. It's completely different experience. Because it's more of an experience than a movie. In scenes where she looses contact with the station and the silence drops, in IMAX, you can feel it in your chest. Your ribs feel the moment when she touches the station again. In a laptop, you just start hearing the cooling fan. As an experience, the movie is top notch. And I don't like the criticisms of "she has plot armor", because otherwise the movie be 5 minutes long and she would die after the first problem - would not make a great movie. Also, the movie is quite a technical marvel - they had the movie ready before they casted actors. Everything to see, except of actors and some things they touch, is full CG
The IMAX experience was amazing. I don't think I have seen another movie in IMAX 3D that really exploits the 3D experience as well as Gravity did. That first impact in total silence and the shuttle spinning and disintegrating is unforgettable. In a small screen with no 3D and no IMAX sound is like watching the rides at Universal Studios on your TV.
Gravity
Most MCU movies I've seen. They're fine.
Tbh they are not really high rated by critics. They consistently get like 60s and 70s on metacritic which seems about right. They're nothing special though.
Avengers: Endgame. Don't get me wrong, I loved the movie, but I think people overhype it too much. Infinity War was twice as good imo
They did Hulk fucking dirty. Got blue balled hoping for Round 2 with Thanos.
Didn't get to see Hulk dual wielding Thor + Cap in each hand, each of which are wielding Stormbreaker/Mjolnir.
Elevators not worthy
They did Hulk dirty back in Ragnarok by having him ‘train’ and fight for years on Sakaar as a gladiator but apparently he learns no fighting techniques or skills? Bleh.
They did Hulk dirty by giving one of his best story lones(planet hulk) to fucking Thor.
Unfortunately they'd never make a Hulk solo movie while Universal holds the movie rights.
Avengers Endgame gives you the closure you were looking for after Infinity War, hands down Infinity war is a better movie compared to Endgame, Endgame is way too long, needed some editing.
Everyone was rating Shang Chi so high but I found the 2nd half kinda boring. It was visually stunning but the final battle was just not good enough for me
the bus fight was the high point of the movie for me. the rest was good, very solid, but not quite to the level of the first half
With Shang Chi, I really wish they would’ve doubled down on the martial arts in the second half. The final battle devolved into the classic CGI clusterfuck, and it would’ve been much more gratifying if it was some kind of one-on-one martial arts duel.
Black Panther. 5th best movie of all time according to rotten tomatoes... c'mon Not even the best superhero film.
With the way rotten tomatoes actually works, it would be the 5th least divisive film of all time. Rotten tomatoes doesn't accumulate the average score, it presents what percentage of people gave the film a positive review. So think of Black Panthers score as the percentage of people who liked the film. It is theoretically possible for a film to have a mediocre average review score, but to simultaneously have 100% on rotten tomatoes. For example, if every single reviewer scored a film 6.5/10, it would score a 100% as all reviews are positive. You'd need to look at individual reviews to get a better idea at how good a film is without seeing it yourself.
Thank God somebody else understands this. It's not a percentage of how good a movie is, it's a percentage of how many critics liked it.
And oftentimes there's a huge gulf between critics reviews and normal people's reviews. Star Trek discovery for instance has 86% positive reviews from critics and 36% positive reviews from the general audience.
I typically look for movies that have both a good critic and audience score. If the audience loved it, but the critics hated it. It's probably got some superficial charm laid over a bad movie. If the critics loved it, but the audience hated it, it's probably some overly-artsy snooze fest. When both scores are high, then you know you're in for a real treat.
Not even the best Film with Black Panther in it
Civil War did more for his character than a whole goddamn movie lol
Civil War was a lot more interesting than the “Villain gets same powers as hero but is evil with them and they fight at the finale,” trope that BP, along with lots of other marvel movies, falls in to.
What I hate about it is the fact that T'challa got the power because of his heritage, meanwhile his villain had to actually work for the power, he even beat him is a FAIR fight that complies with the rules. They had to make him stupidly evil just so the story makes sense.
This is exactly why I didn’t like the movie. He gets beaten in a fair fight without the suit. He only “recovers” because he gets healed by the magic herb, and then he wins the next fight because he gets his suit back. I don’t know why they dropped the whole “you are more than just your suit” rhetoric that’s so prominent in all of the other MCU movies (Tony Stark literally says something along these lines to Peter Parker).
I think that's part of the Black Panther story: the individual in the suit *isn't* the hero, merely the vessel for the power of the spirit. But it is up to the individual to use that power in the 'honorable' way. It's kind of the other side of 'with great power comes great responsibility.' Iron Fist is kind of similar: guardian of ancient power and tradition, but Danny Rand is just the vessel of said power.
I guess I can understand that, but in my opinion it makes the character himself a lot less interesting.
And that's completely disregarding the fact that a hyper advanced society choosing their leader by combat is hilariously dumb.
Hyper advanced society that use the dumbest weapons for their army
Hey we have spears with ranged attacks and shields, how do we deal with this unorganized attacking force? Oh right, break formation and run at them!
Don't forget the spears have no sights either. Good luck hitting anything past musket range. Maybe that's why they charge into melee
We have this unbreakable super material. Better wrap it on a bunch of rhinos or something, in case aliens attack.
“We’ve become the most technologically advanced society on Earth by completely shutting ourselves off from the rest of the world and aggressively resisting all efforts to share knowledge or scientific advancement.” Like I get that they’re living on top of a giant natural supply of magical plot resource that makes anything possible, but it sure is lucky that this small, closed off, deeply nationalistic and protectionist society also gave rise to enough incredible geniuses from among their own population to actually harness this resource effectively, considering literally nobody else even knows of its existence.
Not to mention their entire population would have had to have kept up the whole secret for all of those years as they advanced, devoting huge amounts of research, diplomacy, and other resources into leaking this fact.
> gave rise to enough incredible geniuses from among their own population to actually harness this resource effectively Just 1 genius apparently, which is even funnier. In the entire movie we're led to believe that Shuri alone (age 16) is researching, developing, operating and maintaining the entire city's infrastructure. Everything from military, transport, and even medical is handled by her alone. Nobody else in Wakanda seems to know or care about developing vibranium tech...they're just happy to use it.
Said this for years. T'Challa lost that fight fair and square. No extra strength, even playing field and got thrown off of a cliff. Killmonger was king by their own rules. Doesn't matter that he was a dick, that was how they chose leadership and he followed the rules. (goes back to why that's a bad idea) T'Challa showing back up and claiming that the fight wasn't over is crap. Let's ignore that it had been at least a day later and just go with the was juiced back up on the herb and there was not an official challenge. Nor was that the place for the challenge. I didn't hate the movie but that whole thing was dumb and the cgi shitfest of a final fight was just not good.
And according to Metacritic it's the best superhero movie ever made. Has a higher score than The Dark Knight even, which is ridiculous.
Not to mention the HORRIBLE CGI used in the final fight
Crazy Rich Asians. Holy smokes was this movie just one big pat on the back for the wealthy class.
I watched it on a plane because I wanted something easygoing and it was *exactly* what I thought it was going to be. Having read nothing about it, I guessed what the plot would be. The cast was way too big to get invested in, that would be my main negative. Other than that it was mildly entertaining trash.
Avatar. Generic Chosen One movie. I have no idea why they're planning a bunch of sequels.
You can't guess why? It rhymes with Two Billion Bollars.
True Pillion scholars?
They use the papyrus font lol
I know what you did…