Controversial opinions about other movies

1525354555658»

Comments

  • Last_Rat_StandingLast_Rat_Standing Long Neck Ice Cold Beer Never Broke My Heart
    Posts: 4,416
    There's a few in which I'll have to make it to the cinema this year. John Wick, Indy 5 and Mission Impossible to name a few
  • Posts: 15,818
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    I've read First Blood and I think the movie adaptation is rather weak and sugar coated in comparison. A faithful adaptation done as a tragedy with calls back to the Frankenstein myth could win Oscars.

    I love em both! An incredibly powerful novel but an also bloody good film.

    I think Stallone is terrific in it. Great location work and that stupendous score from Jerry Goldsmith!

    Loved it on the big screen in 1982. An amazing year for top notch cinema.

    I hear ye mate! 1982 was a great year for movies, 'Blade Runner' 'The Thing' 'Tron' among others. And I love 'First Blood' Great big screen experiences!
    Back then I was a regular cinema goer, cant remember the last time I went!

    Yep me too. I used to go at least once a week. The last time I went cinema was NTTD...

    Same here.
  • Just wanted to comment on previous page about favorite westerns. My favorite is “The Wild Bunch,” such a phenomenal film.

    I think my favorite film from the Dollars trilogy may be “For A Few Dollars More.”
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 13,029
    @CrzChris4 your favorite western The Wild Bunch is a trigger for me to revisit it.

    On many levels.

  • Posts: 6,816
    CrzChris4 wrote: »
    Just wanted to comment on previous page about favorite westerns. My favorite is “The Wild Bunch,” such a phenomenal film.

    I think my favorite film from the Dollars trilogy may be “For A Few Dollars More.”

    'The Wild Bunch' is indeed an excellent western!
    Saw a programme on Lee Marvin the other evening, and was reminded of 'The Professionals', also a great western! ( not to be confused with Bodie and Doyle! 🤣)
  • Posts: 14,831
    Not my controversial opinion, but my son's (he's six):

    -How to Train your Dragon is the best movie trilogy ever.
    -Sonic the Hedgehog and its sequel are great movies too.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    edited February 2023 Posts: 4,113
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Not my controversial opinion, but my son's (he's six):

    -How to Train your Dragon is the best movie trilogy ever.
    -Sonic the Hedgehog and its sequel are great movies too.

    They are some of the best kid’s movies of the 15 years or so. Here’s one: if Pixar is truly going ahead with a Toy Story 5, they shouldn’t have Woody and Buzz be the main characters.
  • edited February 2023 Posts: 14,831
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Not my controversial opinion, but my son's (he's six):

    -How to Train your Dragon is the best movie trilogy ever.
    -Sonic the Hedgehog and its sequel are great movies too.

    They are some of the best kid’s movies of the 15 years or so. Here’s one: if Pixar is truly going ahead with a Toy Story 5, they shouldn’t have Woody and Buzz be the main characters.

    I thought Sonic was pretty uneven, but at least they listened to their fans with the design.
  • ToTheRight wrote: »
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    I've read First Blood and I think the movie adaptation is rather weak and sugar coated in comparison. A faithful adaptation done as a tragedy with calls back to the Frankenstein myth could win Oscars.

    I love em both! An incredibly powerful novel but an also bloody good film.

    I think Stallone is terrific in it. Great location work and that stupendous score from Jerry Goldsmith!

    Loved it on the big screen in 1982. An amazing year for top notch cinema.

    I hear ye mate! 1982 was a great year for movies, 'Blade Runner' 'The Thing' 'Tron' among others. And I love 'First Blood' Great big screen experiences!
    Back then I was a regular cinema goer, cant remember the last time I went!

    Yep me too. I used to go at least once a week. The last time I went cinema was NTTD...

    Same here.

    Most films are completely unoriginal. I don’t fault you.
  • Posts: 14,831
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    I've read First Blood and I think the movie adaptation is rather weak and sugar coated in comparison. A faithful adaptation done as a tragedy with calls back to the Frankenstein myth could win Oscars.

    I love em both! An incredibly powerful novel but an also bloody good film.

    I think Stallone is terrific in it. Great location work and that stupendous score from Jerry Goldsmith!

    Loved it on the big screen in 1982. An amazing year for top notch cinema.

    I hear ye mate! 1982 was a great year for movies, 'Blade Runner' 'The Thing' 'Tron' among others. And I love 'First Blood' Great big screen experiences!
    Back then I was a regular cinema goer, cant remember the last time I went!

    Yep me too. I used to go at least once a week. The last time I went cinema was NTTD...

    Same here.

    Most films are completely unoriginal. I don’t fault you.

    Kind of true of all fiction though.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    edited February 2023 Posts: 23,547
    The golden days when all films were original masterpieces never existed. Right from the start, many films simply stole from plays or books, or copied other films. Many trashy flicks have gotten lost, however, and the better ones that survived give the impression that many decades ago, theatre programs were much more charitable in terms of originality. But that feeling is wrong.

    I think the world of 1982 as a movie year--also because it is the year I was born--but even 1982 could not escape a pile of trash infiltrating our cinemas. The "everything was better before" sentiment results from the availability heuristic: we have strong feelings about the present while our information from the past is muddier and less dense. Nostalgic worshipping of the past is not always justified.
  • Posts: 1,571
    CrzChris4 wrote: »
    Just wanted to comment on previous page about favorite westerns. My favorite is “The Wild Bunch,” such a phenomenal film.

    I think my favorite film from the Dollars trilogy may be “For A Few Dollars More.”

    FAFDM ? Better than TGTBATU ? oh...I've got to sit down. I must not be reading this correctly...
    What I very much like about the trilogy is that it gets better film to film. Very often, when people set out to make a multi-film series, they peak at the second, or with the first. But Leone and everyone else involved managed to outdo themselves each time up.
  • Posts: 15,818
    CrzChris4 wrote: »
    Just wanted to comment on previous page about favorite westerns. My favorite is “The Wild Bunch,” such a phenomenal film.

    I think my favorite film from the Dollars trilogy may be “For A Few Dollars More.”

    FOR A FEW DOLLARS MORE is my favorie of the trilogy as well, followed by FISTFUL.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,025
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    The golden days when all films were original masterpieces never existed. Right from the start, many films simply stole from plays or books, or copied other films. Many trashy flicks have gotten lost, however, and the better ones that survived give the impression that many decades ago, theatre programs were much more charitable in terms of originality. But that feeling is wrong.

    I think the world of 1982 as a movie year--also because it is the year I was born--but even 1982 could not escape a pile of trash infiltrating our cinemas. The "everything was better before" sentiment results from the availability heuristic: we have strong feelings about the present while our information from the past is muddier and less dense. Nostalgic worshipping of the past is not always justified.

    When I started to seriously get into film during high school, I thought there was a lot of dreck in the present compared to the past. But over the years I’d go through a lot archives that showed me there were lots of junk films that had simply been forgotten over time.

    Only anyone my age and older would remember a time when Hollywood was churning out turkeys like STEALTH, whereas BATMAN BEGINS in comparison is well remembered to this day.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,547
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    The golden days when all films were original masterpieces never existed. Right from the start, many films simply stole from plays or books, or copied other films. Many trashy flicks have gotten lost, however, and the better ones that survived give the impression that many decades ago, theatre programs were much more charitable in terms of originality. But that feeling is wrong.

    I think the world of 1982 as a movie year--also because it is the year I was born--but even 1982 could not escape a pile of trash infiltrating our cinemas. The "everything was better before" sentiment results from the availability heuristic: we have strong feelings about the present while our information from the past is muddier and less dense. Nostalgic worshipping of the past is not always justified.

    When I started to seriously get into film during high school, I thought there was a lot of dreck in the present compared to the past. But over the years I’d go through a lot archives that showed me there were lots of junk films that had simply been forgotten over time.

    Only anyone my age and older would remember a time when Hollywood was churning out turkeys like STEALTH, whereas BATMAN BEGINS in comparison is well remembered to this day.

    Good lord, STEALTH. :D And THE ONE. And many other expensive, high-tech CGI pieces of nothing.
  • Posts: 14,831
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    The golden days when all films were original masterpieces never existed. Right from the start, many films simply stole from plays or books, or copied other films. Many trashy flicks have gotten lost, however, and the better ones that survived give the impression that many decades ago, theatre programs were much more charitable in terms of originality. But that feeling is wrong.

    I think the world of 1982 as a movie year--also because it is the year I was born--but even 1982 could not escape a pile of trash infiltrating our cinemas. The "everything was better before" sentiment results from the availability heuristic: we have strong feelings about the present while our information from the past is muddier and less dense. Nostalgic worshipping of the past is not always justified.

    When I started to seriously get into film during high school, I thought there was a lot of dreck in the present compared to the past. But over the years I’d go through a lot archives that showed me there were lots of junk films that had simply been forgotten over time.

    Only anyone my age and older would remember a time when Hollywood was churning out turkeys like STEALTH, whereas BATMAN BEGINS in comparison is well remembered to this day.
    I think for many people like me who are from a certain generation (mid 40s or so), there's a certain fondness about bad or lesser films from a few years ago, because that's what we used to watch when we were kids. We didn't have streaming and constant and easy access to high budgets, tailor made films. We watched movies when it was on the tellie. If there was nothing good, we settled for the less bad flick we could find, or the one that had an intriguing premise.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,025
    Ludovico wrote: »
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    The golden days when all films were original masterpieces never existed. Right from the start, many films simply stole from plays or books, or copied other films. Many trashy flicks have gotten lost, however, and the better ones that survived give the impression that many decades ago, theatre programs were much more charitable in terms of originality. But that feeling is wrong.

    I think the world of 1982 as a movie year--also because it is the year I was born--but even 1982 could not escape a pile of trash infiltrating our cinemas. The "everything was better before" sentiment results from the availability heuristic: we have strong feelings about the present while our information from the past is muddier and less dense. Nostalgic worshipping of the past is not always justified.

    When I started to seriously get into film during high school, I thought there was a lot of dreck in the present compared to the past. But over the years I’d go through a lot archives that showed me there were lots of junk films that had simply been forgotten over time.

    Only anyone my age and older would remember a time when Hollywood was churning out turkeys like STEALTH, whereas BATMAN BEGINS in comparison is well remembered to this day.
    I think for many people like me who are from a certain generation (mid 40s or so), there's a certain fondness about bad or lesser films from a few years ago, because that's what we used to watch when we were kids. We didn't have streaming and constant and easy access to high budgets, tailor made films. We watched movies when it was on the tellie. If there was nothing good, we settled for the less bad flick we could find, or the one that had an intriguing premise.

    This I get. I grew up channel surfing, trying to find SOMETHING, ANYTHING that would at least hold my attention. There’s lots of movies I would just watch right when it was in the middle. If I liked it enough, I would then try to catch it from the beginning at another time. I’m pretty sure that’s how I caught PREDATOR.

    So yeah, channel surfing will certainly be a lost art when scheduled broadcasting becomes a thing of the past.
  • Posts: 9,770



    We live in a lesser world because Clive Barker’s Godzilla (which I swear was almost a thing) never happened
  • edited March 2023 Posts: 1,639
    Big Boss (this might be my 2nd favorite despite primitive...it has a rawness that the other Lees dont have to the same extent , great soundtrack by Peter Thomas....it helps to read about the movie , for ex the jade pendant Lee has is to avoid fighting since his dad was killed but its not mentioned in the script)
    Fist of Fury (afa acting is concerned this is prolly Lees best.....the choreography improves here , no doubt , with Lee having more control)
    Way of Dragon (my favorite Lee movie , i like the light comedic tone that turns serious.....only Lee movie not set in Asia)
    Enter Dragon (the fight scene with Sammo , he doesnt look quite healthy here , where is the spark in his eye he had in 1971/72....he was worn out , the super hero image was about to crack & drugs might very well have killed him)

    (Game of Death doesnt count as Lee never finished it.....the 40 mins is amazing to watch tho)
  • edited March 2023 Posts: 1,639
    Chinese Hercules 50 anniversary.....the original title was "Strike a blow for freedom" and "Kid in pier".

    This was obviously released *after* Enter Dragon in the US to capitalize on Bolo. Its similar to Big Boss , more or less......typical Bolo role as the boss' executioner.

    Michael Chan in starring role (ive got his autograph , extremely htf , very cool)

    You also see some faces from BL films (Gam Dai/Chen Ti aka chubby waiter & Wang Shun Tsin aka uncle Wang , the cook.....Gam is still alive afaik)

    Boss : "What do we do with women ?"
    Chiang Tai : "We kill em.....and dump em"
  • Posts: 1,517
    Everything. Everywhere. All at Once. What an ordeal.
  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    Posts: 3,985
    CrabKey wrote: »
    Everything. Everywhere. All at Once. What an ordeal.

    I must admit I felt the same, @CrabKey

    I found it an absolute migraine of a movie. Hotdogs for fingers..??? 🙄

    Mind you, a lot of people seem to love it...
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,547
    CrabKey wrote: »
    Everything. Everywhere. All at Once. What an ordeal.

    I must admit I felt the same, @CrabKey

    I found it an absolute migraine of a movie. Hotdogs for fingers..??? 🙄

    Mind you, a lot of people seem to love it...

    It's a relentlessly crazy film that works for me only on the condition that I have taken in a full gallon of Red Bull. Also, afterwards I need two nights and a full day to recover.
  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    Posts: 3,985
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    CrabKey wrote: »
    Everything. Everywhere. All at Once. What an ordeal.

    I must admit I felt the same, @CrabKey

    I found it an absolute migraine of a movie. Hotdogs for fingers..??? 🙄

    Mind you, a lot of people seem to love it...

    It's a relentlessly crazy film that works for me only on the condition that I have taken in a full gallon of Red Bull. Also, afterwards I need two nights and a full day to recover.

    That doesn't surprise me 😄

    I found it quite exhausting myself, but not in a good way.
  • Posts: 14,831
    Cate Blanchett got robbed of an Oscar again.

    Oh and speaking of robbed Oscars, Gwyneth Paltrow only got hers in 1999 because of a fat bully. Otherwise, she's an average actress at best who became famous because of her good looks and because the aforementioned fat bully wanted to have sex with her.
  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou. I can still hear my old hound dog barkin'.
    Posts: 8,692
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    CrabKey wrote: »
    Everything. Everywhere. All at Once. What an ordeal.

    I must admit I felt the same, @CrabKey

    I found it an absolute migraine of a movie. Hotdogs for fingers..??? 🙄

    Mind you, a lot of people seem to love it...

    It's a relentlessly crazy film that works for me only on the condition that I have taken in a full gallon of Red Bull. Also, afterwards I need two nights and a full day to recover.

    That doesn't surprise me 😄

    I found it quite exhausting myself, but not in a good way.

    I liked it when watching it last night for the first time, as I wrote on the 2023 Oscars thread.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 4,113
    https://collider.com/why-chris-pratt-isnt-a-good-leading-man/

    I agree 100%. Chris Pratt is WAY overrated. Always has been.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,025
    Chris Pratt is fine, the problem is that he’s often way miscast. He works great as Starlord because he’s exceedingly good at playing man-children, like in PARKS AND REC. It’s when he tries playing badass characters that he doesn’t ever feel natural. He’s one of the weakest elements of those Jurassic World films.

    This is why I rail against the suggestions for him being Indy. He’s the total antithesis for what Indy is supposed to be.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    edited April 2023 Posts: 16,330
    I too think Pratt would be an awful Indy. I'm surprised he did a pretty decent Mario. I forgot it was him doing the voice fairly early in.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,547
    Murdock wrote: »
    I too think Pratt be an awful Indy. I'm surprised he did a pretty decent Mario. I forgot it was him doing the voice fairly early in.

    Pratt is very one-note for me. Indy? Nah. He did Starlord well. Then he did Starlord again in JW. I am not interested in Starlord as Indy.
Sign In or Register to comment.