Rules: explain why
Ready player one.
That has to be one of the cringiest movies I’ve seen, is tries so hard, too hard with it’s “WE LOVE YOU NERD, YOU’RE SO COOL FOR PLAYING GAMES AND GETTING THIS 80S REFERENCE” message and the whole “corporation bad, the people good” narrative seems written for toddlers… The fan service feels cheap and adds nothing to the story.
Finally, they trying to make the people believe that very attractive girl with a barely visible red tint spot on her face is “ugly”… Like wtf?
Yet it received decent reviews plus being one of the most successful movies of that year.
Pretty much all of the Avengers films.
They aren’t engaging in any way. The characters are unintelligent and full of self importance. The whole franchise is Just loud noises and shark jumping.
Kind of agree with you. I liked it until endgame, but it was a downward slope afterwards
I liked the MCU, at first, but it had no business continuing after End Game.
I feel the same. Everything up until Endgame had some entertainment value. Most of what’s after is a low-quality cash grab
My problem is witg cg fights. I feel like I’m just watching a three hour long cut scene.
I mean they’re silly by default. They are not supposed to be high art. I like half of the MCU. Raimi spiderman Is as silly yet I consider it a masterpiece of a film, 2 even more.
removed by mod
I find nuggets in them. Iron man 3 had issues, but I was fascinated by the portrayal of Tony stark’s ptsd after the battle of new York. Sure, seeing a bunch of robots is fun, but it’s not really engaging. The intersection of everyday life, mental trauma, and super powers and responsibilities is fascinating to me.
It makes me feel snobbish to say you have to be literally juvenile to enjoy it. I just don’t get it. There’s no suspense at all, no surprise in anything. They’re all boring, intelligent characters. Even as films aimed at kids they’re bad, but I’m eternally surprised at the traction they get with 20s-30s…
With so many a-list actors, they all get different story arcs, and fight for screen time, so there isn’t time to tell a nuanced or interesting story, and when they’re together it’s just an orgy of showing off how cool they are
The nightmare before christmas. IDK maybe i’ve been exposed to it too much but I have never gotten an ounce of enjoyment watching the movie. The songs are lame and the plot is mind numbingly simple, you know so the kids can follow. So many people in my life just love it and want to make watching it every year for both halloween and christmas a tradition thing. I don’t want to be a kill joy so I power through it every year. Im so tired of it though, How many more times do I have to hear that barrage of stupid disney sing songs just to spend time with my loved ones? “WhAt’s ThiS TheRes WhitE Stuff EverYWHEre!” Fuck you jack skellington you sheltered prick. Its called cocaine and its how santa and his elves get shit done. Now travel around a few other holiday trees and do some world building so Disney can pump out a half baked sequel else they might go for a live action remake starring photorealistic cgi stitched together corpses.
Its called cocaine and its how santa and his elves get shit done
I am stealing this. I legit hurt from laughing at this line.
The only Tim Burton movie that was worth a damn was Big Fish
I really liked Batman though
I loved Batman Returns in the 90s. Tried watching it again a year or so ago: couldn’t get past the sexism.
Didn’t realize Tim Burton was behind Big Fish. I enjoyed it, but it kinda grew on me more than anything
Snowpiercer. The movie was just a weak attempt at socio-economic metaphor, with an absolutely terrible premise, bad effects, action sequences shot mostly in the dark, weird pacing, and goofy characters. It seemed like a live-action Anime, and I hate Anime. I sat through that movie, the whole time wondering how and why it got such great reviews.
Oof. I love that movie. I thought it was extremely well chorographed. The fight scenes were awesome. Weird how opinions differ.
I felt like I was taking crazy pills while watching it as I tried to reconcile what I was experiencing vs what I heard from others.
The socio hierarchy stuff is the point of the movie. Well done metaphor. Thought provoking even if you hate the exposition.
I will eat your best tasting babies for not being in line with the movie critic hierarchy. Back of the train with you.
Nothing wrong with metaphors… Until they are so dull and ridiculous as if thought up by a sixth grader doing a lit assignment. Snowpiercer is that. That’s all it is. There is nothing profound on insightful or interesting or new. That’s all it is: the embodiment of a really dull metaphor. Just my opinion of course.
The show does a better job, but the premise itself is such a stretch
Interstellar. That ending was so unbelievably dumb that I can’t even stomach the rest of the movie thinking about it.
I know it’s got rave reviews, a stacked cast, Nolan directing. Plenty was pretty, cool concepts, high stakes scenes. But that ending… shudders
honestly, i disagree. i really don’t see the big problems with the ending. i actually even like it.
the library (called a tesseract in the movie) is constructed by the future humans, who have control of 5d space, and who include Murphy, who actually lived in the room connected to the tesseract. it’s built to look like that, so Cooper, a 3d being, can actually understand it. it’s basically stretching out time and gravity into a 3d space. the library is not something the black hole made up because Cooper loves Murphy (which i thought what happened on my first watch), it’s what the future humans made with the help of the black hole. love ties thematically into it, 'cause Cooper loves and knows Murphy so well, he knows how to tell her the quantum data from the black hole, or something. and Cooper, or the future humans for that matter, can’t say or do anything directly, 'cause in the past, they’re only able to affect gravity (and because of the construction of the tesseract, Cooper can only control the gravity of that one room.) the reason for why the future humans don’t go just directly do it themselves is explained as them not being able to pinpoint a specific space, or time for it, which is why Cooper, who can traverse the tesseract for a specific point in time and space in that room to tell Murphy the quantum data, which allows the future humans to do all of the crazy 5d stuff.
anyway, sorry for the rambling. Interstellar is my favourite movie, and i really love even the ending of it. multiple scenes, including the ending, make me bawl like a baby, like no other movie has done to me, and i love all the hard sci-fi it has. sci-fi so hard, that physicists learned something new about black holes, because of the equations used to make the black hole cgi in it.
I didn’t like the ending, it seemed like kind of a big letdown. I don’t remember it, I just remember being surprised at how bland it was when the rest of the movie had me on the edge of my seat.
Oh, yeah, that space library bullshit was so fucking bad it made the rest of the movie bad retroactively. Well, maybe he could save the Earth by screaming “Murph!!!1!1!!1!” a little louder. Or more often.
That meme always makes me think of Heavy Rain.
Which meme?
Hmm, I guess it’s not as prevalent as I thought, but I’ve commonly seen the “Murph!” thing referenced online. Perhaps “meme” was the wrong word.
In the video game Heavy Rain, there’s a scene wherein the protagonist loses his son and has to search a crowd for the kid. While playing through that scene, you can press a button to shout his name. There is no limit to how often you can do this. Additionally, sometimes the game will apparently glitch so you can do it throughout the entire game.
Warning, potential spoilers for a game from 2010: https://youtu.be/DAhG9D9UO7c
That’s very valid but there’s one thing I don’t understand : how can the ending affect the whole experience? To me that’s like saying “sex is meh because the shower afterwards is boring”. Don’t know if I’m making sense lol
To me, most endings are mediocre because endings are just very hard to write. It is very rare to have both the elements for a great story, and the setup for a great ending. In that context I feel like investing too much on the ending hurts the whole experience, whereas a weak ending just hurts the last ten minutes.
For me interstellar suffered from it’s hype. i expected a great, innovative movie and found it… okay.
Interesting opinion. The ending of Interstellar made me cry like a baby. Shit was great.
Yes. Fucking yes. That movie and everyone in it is so dumb, I wonder who the people raving about this hot garbage are.
For me I really hated the audio in that movie. It was the most stereotypical Nolan BWOM crap throughout and yet the dialog was whisper quiet.
Oh and the plot was just Contact again…felt really unoriginal
To me, it’s one of those movies that seems like it could have been great, and as you say it had cool concepts and high stakes scenes. But there were just too many places where the characters were dumb, and they had to be dumb in order to make the story work, and then story itself is pretty weak. To me, it’s not a terrible movie, but I’ve never understood all the hype around it.
I was done with this movie from the start. The story about setting the table differently because of the dust?! GTFO That’s why cabinets have doors on them! I was too miffed after that
But … wasn’t that story from someone who actually lived through the dust bowl?
I don’t think so…but even if it was, cabinets with doors existed long before the dust bowl. People understood and solved the ‘dust on flatware’ issue long ago.
People understood and solved the ‘dust on flatware’ issue long ago.
No, they didn’t. I live in a dusty city and dust gets in everywhere, no matter how tightly you pack it.
I don’t think so…
Then you’re wrong and you should do some thinking
While audiences will probably recognise actress Ellen Burstyn among the faces - who is later revealed to be portraying old Murph - the rest are all total unknowns.
The reason for that? They’re not actors at all, but real life survivors of the Great Depression, who are actually speaking about the Dust Bowl catastrophe of the 1930s.
More to the point, Nolan wasn’t lucky enough to film this footage himself: he borrowed it - with permission, of course - from legendary documentarian Ken Burns’ 2012 docu-series The Dust Bowl.
https://whatculture.com/film/10-movie-facts-you-probably-already-knew-deep-down?page=5
why would you put doors on cabinets then?? Mine seem to work properly…
To stop even more dust…? Are you someone who also thinks we shouldn’t do things unless they’re going to work 100%?
What kind of dumb gotcha is this?
Seems like right-wing idiot-logic. “Masks don’t stop ALL particles of saliva, therefore why wear them!? Sheeple!”
its just a dumb part from a bad movie, that’s all.
Oh shit I completely forgot about that. So dumb, absolutely love it
Some Nolan stuff.
Inception: I understand it, it’s just extremely convoluted and dumb.
Oppenheimer: It’s a movie with 95% dialogue, and he decided to put loud droning music under every conversation so you can barely hear the people talking.
The dark knight trilogy: I just can’t take batman seriously in it. The voice is so silly, and the pointy ears just look really out of place in this very serious take.
Anyway, I do like some of Nolans movies, these are my pet peeves.It’s a movie with 95% dialogue, and he decided to put loud droning music under every conversation so you can barely hear the people talking.
The audio mixing in his movies is genuinely terrible. If you aren’t watching them with subtitles, you’re probably missing half the plot because of background noise.
I guess he refuses to use ADR but also films with an imax camera which is about as loud as a lawnmower. So all the dialogue needs to be extracted from all that noise and it sounds like shit.
Nearly all Nolan stuff. His movies are cold and impersonal, and his characters are just dull (and he can’t write a woman character that’s not one dimensional). I can’t remember the name of any of the characters bar the main ones. I feel like that’s his main job and he can’t do it. Everything else in the movie has a team of people (sound, lighting, design etc) but his area is always the let down.
That Bane movie was one of the most comically bad I’ve ever seen. Terrible acting, ridiculous plot points, dozens of plot holes.
I think Nolan is good at putting things together, but he lacks emotion and depth.
Bane:
Mhhphhm hmmph mugghhh hnnnph!
???
i disagree on atleast one movie: Interstellar. it is absolutely devastatingly emotional, atleast for me.
the scenes where Cooper sees his kids growing up without him after coming from the water planet, and the ending sequence when he goes into the black hole and the tesseract will never not make me bawl out like a baby.
Nolan is so overrated his Batman trilogy sucked except Heath Ledger as the joker. Everything since the WW2 film he did has been overly pretentious.
The Substance
It looks like everyone involved felt like they were making something super deep and meta. The plot fully relies on every character making the worst and unrelatable choices imaginable. Insteadt of deconstructing the sexist, male gaze the camera revels in it and all that is accompanied by the most nervegrinding disney-esque sound design.
Probably most films by Darren Aronofsky. Pi and The Fountain are some of the worst movies I’ve seen. Feels like someone’s artsy shroom trip. I dislike most “artsy” movies without a coherent story.
Also a lot of horror classics bores me to death. For example The Omen, Poltergeist, The Exorcist.
The Omen, Poltergeist, The Exorcist.
Makes sense. Those were groundbreaking at the time, but the ground has been broken, repaved and built into a massive skyscraper now.
I’ve always felt like Darren Aronofsky makes great movies but absolutely sucks at ending them. Every movie of his, that I’ve seen, I’ve enjoyed up until the last 5-10 minutes. He just makes the most depressing endings, that make me regret watching the movie.
Requiem for a Dream still slaps tho
And the soundtrack, it freaking slaps
If you mean like slapping a puddle of diarrhea, then I agree. IIRC the movie’s style was so annoying and the plot so boring that it’s a small miracle I managed to finish it in the first place.
Rogue One: A Star Wars Story.
Absolute incompetence start to finish. Low IQ fans go “Woooo! Vader’s a BADASS!” ignoring how it completely fucks up the opening of Star Wars.
I upvoted you because it’s my favourite star wars film and I’ve never heard anyone dislike it
It get’s a lot of hate, especially from armchair critics. I’m an armchair critic myself, but I truthfully do not understand the hate. Everytime I rewatch Rogue One, I try to find reasons to hate it, but it’s pretty watchable if you ask me. People hate Jin and complain that her character and motivations make no sense, but I disagree. Her decisions are logically consistent with what she learns about her father as the movie progresses.
Anyway, I enjoy it every time I watch it, which is far more than I can say for the vast majority of Star Wars movies and shows produced in the 21st century.
The first time, I walked out. I was dubious when they introduced Cassian by having him straight up murder an innocent person, but when it came time to assassinate a legitimate military target and suddenly he gets all sweaty and, OH! JUST - CAN - NOT - PULL - THE - TRIGGER!
Yeah, I was done. It took me 3 tries to actually finish watching it, it was so bad.
I found out later exactly WHY it was so shitty…
The original writer/director never started with a script. He started with a supercut of scenes from other movies to try and figure out how long each scene should be. So the bit with Jyn arguing with the rebellion? That was the scene from Aliens with Ripley arguing with the corpos, and so on.
"There was no screenplay, there was just a story breakdown at that point, scene by scene. He got me to rip hundreds of movies and basically make ‘Rogue One’ using other films so that they could work out how much dialogue they actually needed in the film.
It’s very simple to have a line [in the script] that reads “Krennic’s shuttle descends to the planet”, now that takes maybe 2-3 seconds in other films, but if you look at any other ‘Star Wars’ film you realise that takes 45 seconds or a minute of screen time. So by making the whole film that way – I used a lot of the ‘Star Wars’ films – but also hundreds of other films too, it gave us a good idea of the timing."
So not starting with the script is problem #1. Problem #2 was just shooting random shit with no purpose. This is why the trailers were full of shots not used in the movie. He called it “Indie Hour” and straight up admits he had no idea why he was doing it:
https://gizmodo.com/why-the-rogue-one-trailers-most-iconic-shot-never-appea-1790910745
“I was like, “Oh my god that looked great.” And I was like “Stop stop stop!” and everyone stopped. “This will take 10 seconds, just roll camera”….Then obviously 10 seconds turned into a half hour, and we probably did 17 takes. So that ended and there’s that feeling of, “Well what was that for?” And I was like, “I don’t know, that just felt good.””
So, naturally the original writer/director got bounced out and they had to bring in a new guy to salvage the mess as much as he could, which meant re-writes, re-shoots, etc. Problem #3. His biggest problem was he never liked Star Wars and didn’t feel strongly about it. So, main character murdering an innocent? Meh, no big deal.
https://www.worldofreel.com/blog//2018/04/tony-gilroy-says-rogue-one-shoot-was.html
“That was my superpower. A) I don’t like ‘Star Wars’—not that I don’t like it, but I’ve never been interested in ‘Star Wars’ ever, so I had no reverence for it whatsoever, I was unafraid about that and they were in such a swamp… they were in so much, terrible, terrible trouble that all you could do was improve their position.”
How does it completely fuck up the opening of star wars?
That’s not the same Vader who is revealed in those open moments of Star Wars.
What, did he pop a valium in between movies and mellow out all the sudden?
removed by mod
All star wars for me is bad. Rogue one at least was cool and for ONCE Vader didn’t looked like a joke to me.
Genuinely curious. How so?
Vader’s argument with Leia goes out the window if he literally watches them fly away with the Death Star Plans.
Same with the argument on the Death Star when he chokes the guy out… “Bitch, I was in the same hallway with them, I just… didn’t grab them… for… reasons.”
It’s funny, the one thing you specifically called out is the one part of it I did like. The connection to the beginning of A New Hope is great. But I didn’t like pretty much any of the rest of the movie, including the rest of the final sequence. Especially that nonsense with the non-jedi Jedi.
I really liked Rogue One, except for the Vader bit. Really unnecessary fan service, which didn’t fit with the rest of the film IMO.
The only thing it messed with was one line about Bothan spies?
That line was about the second death star from RTJ.
Bothan spies was Jedi, not Star Wars. :)
I understand most of this view. Most the movie is pretty bad. I do think it makes a fitting transfer to ANH though.
Forest Gump. The 1994 Best Picture nominees were some of the most highly competitive the Academy has ever had, and they went with the one that was just a straight-up terrible fucking movie. It has no value except as nostalgia bait for Americans and propaganda for those who want to believe in the myth of American individual exceptionalism.
Its musical score is also probably the worst thing I’ve ever had the misfortune of performing in an orchestra. Dull and repetitive.
And its most famous line is straight-up bullshit. I’ve heard the book does it differently, but the movie puts “something that kinda sounds deep to a 14 year old” over a level of rationality that stands up to 20 seconds of thought from an average person. A box of chocolates tells you precisely what you’re going to be getting.
Can’t help but love that you’re criticizing the line as faux-deep when it was delivered by someone with a mental disability.
Yeah, but a lot of the point is how despite being mentally disabled, he’s supposed to have deeper insight into things. That’s certainly how the cultural perception of the movie is. The problem is that the “insight” he has and which both the movie itself and the cultural memory of the movie treat as genuinely meaningful is actually fucking dumb.
The book is WILD! Gump goes to space, there’s a lot more racism and sexism in the book, and Gump doesn’t come off as a lucky mentally challenged, but overall nice guy. He ends the book looking like a racist asshole, and criminal, IIRC. I read the book as a teenager after seeing the movie and that was the first book that I decided that the movie was actually better.
There’s a YouTube video that’s like “What if Forrest Gump took place in modern day.”
And it’s wonderful, he gets beaten up during the George Floyd protests by police and thinks it was because he called for a cab not knowing calling for a taxi was illegal. (The cops misheard him and thought he shouted “ACAB”), then later he decides to go on vacation to the Capitol because he’s a patriotic American and he’s always wanted to see it, he goes there and meets other excited patriots who seem to be having some kind of a party (It’s January 6th 2021)
It has no value except as nostalgia bait for Americans and propaganda for those who want to believe in the myth of American individual exceptionalism.
If anything, Forrest Gump is a satire of The American Dream^^^TM
Only guy to have such a successful life without doing anything unethical is a mentally challenged, politically unaware, and extremely lucky, who does everything he’s told without questioning it.
It’s truly a film about not judging the book by its cover and allowing for that to happen instead of taking the film literally you can see the themes and especially satire/parody of the American dream as described above.
It’s white exceptionalism mixed with conservative narratives about Murican history.
A box of chocolates tells you precisely what you’re going to be getting.
This is probably one of the weakest arguments against this movie—and there’s plenty to criticize. Labeling the chocolates was not always a common practice. It’s something mass produced chocolates started to do. There was a time people bought from a confectioner and there wouldn’t be labels. That’s the context of the line. You can criticize this line but the labeling isn’t the problem.
I had listened to the audio book before I saw the movie. The movie is so off the mark on the ridiculous life of Forest Gump. My favorite part of the book is that Jenny leaves him, she doesn’t die, she leaves him because he becomes a major pot head.
she leaves him because he becomes a major pot head.
Why do I know wanna see a modern remake of the film where Forrest Gump gets baked and goes on Joe Rogan? Then says some shit that accidentally fixes the Left-Right Divide and leads to Trump being kicked out of office?
that would be spot on!
Inception. Hard to explain why. Interesting visual fx with a weird plot played by admittably world class actors.
Not necessarily hate, but did not like as much as the rest of the internet: Oppenheimer
The moment I left the theater, I thought it should have been longer. Yes, I think an already 3hr film should be even longer. Just torture the audience at this point. But I thought that there was just so much stuff to cram into that 3hr length, there was not enough room for the story to breath, even if those stories were needed to paint a better picture of Oppenheimer’s life, morals, and conflicts.
I’d still recommend it to people. If anything, it’s still a visually well directed film. But if you aren’t a physics/history buff, you might not enjoy the story as much.
In my opinion, a better history based movie would be The Imitation Game. Much more focused story, even if some aren’t historically accurate.
I thought the nuclear explosion was pretty disappointing. It was hyped up so much and it’s just like, a normal explosion zoomed in. It didn’t look like a nuclear bomb went off to me.
Exactly this. You can’t hype up an audience to that degree and make them sit through 3 hours without showing them something theyve never seen before. And at this point you can’t just Nolan your way out by making the blast larger than life, because I think by now we possibly all imagine it bigger than it actually was. But what you can do is some sort of trippy shit where the blast goes on for ages, where it ripping things apart is shown in some sort of artistic and novel way, perhaps something emphasising an old world is being torn apart and this is a new nuclear age. ANYTHING. except a half hearted blast that looked and felt like half hearted CG. And the irony is the production team went out of their way to avoid using CG. It was just immensely unsatisfying and rushed and all the momentum of the film was lost. It just didn’t feel momentus enough.
If they’d been bolder they’ve have culminated with the bombing of Hiroshima and shown the horror in some new terrifying light…
But what you can do is some sort of trippy shit where the blast goes on for ages, where it ripping things apart is shown in some sort of artistic and novel way, perhaps something emphasising an old world is being torn apart and this is a new nuclear age.
I don’t know if you’ve seen Twin Peaks, Season 3, ep 8, but if not… well, I think you’ll find it matches your description pretty well. Plus there are weird spooky Abraham Lincoln lookalikes covered in soot. And a performance from The Nine Inch Nails.
None of the above is made up.
Twin Peaks Season 3 was chaos. That episode was perfect for it. My wife and I did all three seasons in a row a couple or few years back, and the 20-something year gap gave David Lynch a whole lot of time to make the show bananas. The first two seasons had their oddity. Season three was on another planet.
It really was, and I loved every minute of it. Did you also watch Fire Walk With Me in your watch through? Wild stuff, although significantly less fun than much of the show, obviously. Brilliant though.
It was honestly the one time where I was like, ya, CG would have been better. Or restored footage or something. It also looked like they used the cotton technique like they do on models but I might be misremembering.
If you know the actual story of Oppenheimer, you know the movie is garbage. It made it about this mostly fictitious investigation before Congress because of a pretty feud
It made it about this mostly fictitious investigation before Congress because of a pretty feud
Hmmmm
Was J. Robert Oppenheimer stripped of his security clearance due to his Communist ties?
Yes. The controversial Oppenheimer security hearing at the heart of both the movie and the book on which it is based took place in 1954 toward the end of McCarthyism, a campaign that targeted suspected Communists and Communist sympathizers. Oppenheimer’s hearing was conducted by the United States Atomic Energy Commission (AEC).
deleted by creator
Yes, I think an already 3hr film should be even longer. Just torture the audience at this point.
Admittedly I haven’t watched it, but at this point wouldn’t it be a better idea to divide it into two parts?
It would, but it also probably would be a bad idea to do so. How many people would come back for a part 2 of a documentary film? I think not a lot.
Anime. I just don’t get the appeal.
They’re just stories with a different set of tropes than what we typically see in the west.
The issue is the way the stories are done in the super cheesy/corny/wierd style that is anime. Just not something I find entertaining.
Animation in general will exaggerate the expression of emotion by necessity, to an extent.
I’m not sure what style you’re talking about specifically, that is inherent to anime. If I had to guess you’ve just not been exposed to anime in other styles.
But it’s fine if you’ve got enough media that you like, not everyone needs to try everything.
I mean, that’s not unique.
I’m looking at you Heroes 🤣
My friend who never watches anime always goes on about the same point and I just have to laugh because there are maybe 2 shows matching that description out of 100 in a year.
So as an anime fan I’ll give a hint on terminology if you want to take an approach at it. What you’re talking about is the genre Shonen which is targeted for boys in school, roughly translates even to “young boy.” Because of that it’s the ones that you have a group that’s relatively easy to cater to… hence drag on for ever and ever like US comic books. There are a LOT of genres in anime like there are in western tv and it’ll still be a YMMV because completely different culture, but because of the medium there are still some small studios that are willing to do some stories that are difficult to get in western media because it’s too risky for corporations (granted that’s been less the case with streaming coming out)
The number one that I’m sure anyone would recommend if you want to make an attempt is Cowboy Bebop because it’s a good blend of western sensibility, it’s a noir in being a group of down on their luck bounty hunters in space, set to a jazz, blues and rock soundtrack and has a good English dub from an era back when that was rare. And importantly, the story ends.
I like anime, but wont touch shounen with a ten foot pole. And that includes “American Anime”, which seems to almost exclusively be the shounen genre.
Western shows tend to fall into a similar pattern. A show will just keep getting dragged on longer then it should and end up tanking its popularity. How fucking long did Super Natural or Walking Dead last?
removed by mod
Have you watched non episodic anime? There’s a lot of Movie length anime out there often with more mature theming.
Akira was probably the first anime that put the medium on the map for me at all. The animated Ghost in the shell movie is also pretty good. And almost all of the Studio Ghibli films.
You could also try stuff like Cowboy Bebop or Serial Experiments Lain for episodic but still short works.
Anime is a medium. It’s like saying “American cartoon”, yeah like, which one? The Simpsons? ATLA?
At least give one title or something for people who don’t treat them as a genre.
removed by mod
Right. I don’t like the genre. I don’t know any specific titles. It’s no different than me not liking lifetime movies. I can’t tell you the title of any specific show or movies I just know if it’s on, and I’m watching it for whatever reason, I do not enjoy watching it.
It’s no different than me not liking lifetime movies.
Fair point, you do you.
For me the appeal is “2D Animation is a genre I like, and outside of Cal-Art bullshit it’s basically dead in my home country.”
For me its mostly that with a bit of “this is a foreign film/show so some cultural references and formulas are entirely new to me!” excitement sprinkled in
I hate the Beatles.
If you say the word “imagine” into a microphone then you’re allowed to beat your kids.
The white album has some bangers on it
I’ll help you row that boat. My music theory teacher in high school fucking hated them and spent a good amount of time explaining why they sucked lol
Do you remember any of the reasons? People who know music generally hold them in high regard.
They’re talented I’ll admit that but I hate them. Can’t remember much but I’ll never forget him saying, you can take any 4 chords then throw a 7th on the end and bam! You’re Paul McCartney, congratulations lol.
Hahaha fair enough
removed by mod
This is awesome. I remember reading (not at the time) a music critic absolutely slamming the debut Korn album (1994). Just hated it. Couldn’t understand it at all. About as harsh as this. Needless to say the album is pivotal and his critique of the album did not stand the test of time at all.
I studied music theory in high school and college
the beatles fucking blow
Huh. So do think that people who do hold them in high regard A) have nostalgia attached B) like them because they were doing some interesting things with recording - being the 60s/70s C) are simpletons or D) other reasons entirely
Out of interest: What music do you like and/or recommend?
I hate ABBA.
Really anything with that dude is just not funny to me. But that movie is a real low point.
I know I’ll get shit, but Pulp Fiction sucks. It’s not about anything, Bruce Willis adds nothing to the film at all, and it’s confusing to watch without having any real reason to be or payoff.
The worst part is that it’s one of those things where if you don’t like it, the fans just belittle you and claim you’re “Just not smart enough to get it man.” or they’ll be passive aggressive about it. “Oh it’s okay, my ditzy blonde girlfriend doesn’t get it either.” or “Not every movie can be about guns and shit, I know you stopped paying attention after the opening.”
It’s a shame because it was hyped up to me as one of the best movies of all time, and I try to watch it thinking this time it will click, this time I can see what the fuss is about.
And each time, it’s just as terrible as I remember for all the same reasons as last time.
While on this subject It’s a TV Show and not a movie, but I legitimately believe Andor is one of the worst pieces of Star Wars media ever created and if given the choice I’d sooner watch the Holiday Special because at least it’s entertainingly bad. Instead of being a god damn hour straight of characters marching like they’re at a military parade just to get to a boring shoot-out at a heist where everyone dies, only unlike when everyone dies in the heist in Rogue One, I don’t shed a single tear because everyone involved with said heist has done absolutely nothing but bitch at Andor for not being “one of the cool kids” so if I’m feeling any emotion it’s annoyance that my time getting to know these losers was completely wasted and relief that such unlikable characters are dead.
But hey, at least it only ruined Cassian Andor, it could have ruined someone who’s been in more than one movie like Book of Boba Fett did. Ya know what Boba Fett’s “book” is called in this show; Character Assassination: A How-To Guide
I don’t know how you ruin a character who’s done nothing but say “He’s no good to me dead” in one movie, and have a retconned-in-most-continuities death in the next, but leave it to Disney’s second Dark Age to find a way. But hey, at least every one agrees that Book of Boba Fett is trash instead of kissing the ground it walks on like Andor. So there’s that.
Andor is a show so bad that there’s a character named Cyril who’s entire existence is dedicated to scenes where he eats Cereal. Absolute trash.
Anyway getting back to how the pulp of orange juice is more fun to watch than Pulp Fiction, Quentin Tarantino is a hack who sucks at every aspect of film making that isn’t writing dialogue. Resevoir Dogs was okay though.
My controversial take? Boba Fett doesn’t have enough personality in the movies for the show to be able to ruin him. He appears, does shit all, and then dies like an absolute chump. There’s no reason for him to have the huge cult following he does, unless you’re looking to extended universe non-canon stuff anyway.
Oh I agree that he’s overrated and a zero note character, and Book of Boba Fett STILL character assassinated him. The show made him entirely ignorant to how criminal organizations work despite him working so closely with Jabba literally his whole life, like more naivety than would be expected of an adult in this universe.
They acted like Jake Lyold’s Anakin was made a crime boss
It REALLY didn’t need the rape scene… aside from that I am a fan tho :P
Pulp Fiction is subversive and meta. I loved it when it came out, but I’m scared to watch it again today - I’m not a big Tarantino fan anymore.
When it comes to Andor and Pulp Fiction, I can see some similarities. Could it be that you don’t appreciate the counter-cinematic approach of including everyday life scenes in the storytelling? They make the plot move more slowly and can seem just out of place and odd.
I personally like them, because they help me understand the characters and world they live in.
I mean in Pulp Fiction, there are some good scenes and amazing dialogue. I will admit that some of the best moments are things like Samuel L. Jackson talking about cheeseburgers, John Travolta going out to dinner with Mrs. Wallace, or Tarentino himself just having coffee while trying to figure out the situation. I like these scenes because in a movie that straight up does not care about trying to be entertaining, having a point, or telling a story, at least something memorable is going on.
I hate Tarentino, not because he has no talent, but because the only skill he seems to possess is writing dialogue, and basically nothing else.
My problem is that the movie ultimately doesn’t tell a story about Jules and Vince, it just kind of meanders and goes nowhere. Nothing is ever actually done with these characters. Mia bonds with Vince and then has an overdose, so I’m glad we got to spend time knowing her, don’t I just feel like we accomplished something there? As for Vince and Jules, Jules quits, Vince dies in a bathroom, oh and some guy named Marvin gets carted off to the deceased African American storage that Tarantino runs, as you can tell from the helpful sign in his front yard.
Who is Marvin? Who’s the guy that seems to congratulate Jules and Vince when he comes to pick Marvin’s body up? Why do I care about either? Why are Jules and Vince seemingly being exonerated and honored if Marvin’s death wasn’t supposed to happen? Who the fuck is Marvin?
Oh and something about stolen gold or something. I gotta admit, I don’t give a shit what’s in the box. I don’t care if it’s the award Tarentino wanted to win, I don’t care if it’s Marcellus Wallace’s soul.
By the way it isn’t: The whole “It’s Marcellus Wallace’s soul!” theory originated from fanboys trying to pretend the movie is deep. I’ve looked into the “Oh he has that thing on head, and in this one culture that means your soul was removed!” and the only time I’ve seen that referenced while looking into to get more details is in… descriptions of Pulp Fiction. Why would I care if it was?
Marcellus Wallace is the biggest “tell, don’t show” in all of fiction. We’re supposed to believe he’s the baddest motherfucker who ever lived, and we see no evidence of that. Actually we see the exact opposite happen, he gets raped by some hillbillies in a scene that only exists for shock value. Then he just tells Bruce Willis (who I still have no idea why he’s in the movie at all) to leave town.
Oh I’m so scared…
I might care if it’s the diamonds from Resevoir Dogs, simply because that’s a much better movie as things actually happen in it.
I’m fine with counter-culture and subversion, it’s just I’d like for there to be some kind of point, some kind of payoff. If the movie doesn’t give a shit, I shouldn’t be expected to either.
If the point of the movie is that it doesn’t have a point, there are much better films that do that.
For God’s sake; Freddy Got Fingered is a better film that does that, and that’s not a compliment to Tom Green. At least FGF doesn’t pretend that it demands or even deserves my respect, therefore as an audience member I feel less insulted by comparison.
Fuck now I’m gonna have “Daddy would you like some sausage?” stuck in my head all day.
I probably saw it in the right age when I was able to appreciate the randomness, I don’t know whether I would still like it now. What I do know is I really enjoyed your passionate description of the plot with all it’s flaws, that was a fabulous read!
