EPT/rant
oh and yeah donnie darko's a piece of shit, I think I liked it when I was 15, rewatched it like a few years later and was ashamed of myself
Your Taste in Movies Sucks - Page 2
| Blogs > I_Love_Bacon |
|
251
United States1401 Posts
/rant oh and yeah donnie darko's a piece of shit, I think I liked it when I was 15, rewatched it like a few years later and was ashamed of myself | ||
|
arb
Noobville17921 Posts
On July 20 2010 02:11 251 wrote: I swear I'm the only person that hates the Hangover out of all of my friends, and I will defend to the end and back that that movie is a complete piece of shit, and I have no idea how people find that mindless, boring, slow, wandering around Vegas doing nothing of a movie is considered comedy. I agree with you on every point, including some others. The only potentially funny character of The Hangover is Galifinakis' character, and even then he was subpar. I like his standup just fine, its not gut busting, but its good. But as a support? Our main characters are a douchey wannabe badass leader-type and a dentist crying about his tooth the entire movie. OMG HAHAHAHA WOOOW A TIGER IN THE BATHROOM WHAT DID THEY DOOO?? WOW MIKE TYSON? OMG THE ASIAN GUY IN THE TRUNK~ What the hell is supposed to be funny about the asian guy in the trunk? Like most people that I get in an argument with point to that scene as something of comedic substance. No, not really. Oh wow he did the jack-off splooge on you motion. So I paid 10 dollars for pictures at the end of a movie? I cringed through that flick and I am disgusted that the majority of America finds it funny. /rant oh and yeah donnie darko's a piece of shit, I think I liked it when I was 15, rewatched it like a few years later and was ashamed of myself He's from the same county as me !! :D :D :D :D But, i thought most of it wasnt funny but some of it was actually quite humorous, was another one of those, some parts are funny but others where they try hard to be funny are just stupid | ||
OneOther
United States10774 Posts
| ||
|
fly.stat
United States449 Posts
On July 20 2010 02:04 Ummbeefy wrote: For the most part his "reviews" of the movies express opinions about his perception of your opinion on a given film. Anyone can be an expert about how they feel about your tastes. And, I will say, most of the listed movies have a degree of pop-culture status and yes, they do in fact suck. Scarface and The Hangover both entertained me though. Finally, God yes Napoleon Dynamite is a piece of horse shit movie. The nunchucks line was almost funny but for the rest of the 90 minute load of vomit I failed to understand when the funny part was coming. Saying Scarface was plagued by bad acting isn't what I would call an opinion. It's more like a falsified fact. I judge movies based on artistic innovation, not "taste". I sample everything in the restaurant every time I go. I find joy in watching a movie to see the director's hand at work. I would like to make that crystal clear. I don't hate bad movies; I love a bunch of Tom Cruise movies and silly comedies. But would I say that they are bad, in the sense that they bring nothing new to the artistic palette of cinema? Yes I would. It goes by how you define "good" and "bad", and I'm of the belief that if you think something is good merely because you enjoyed it, you're missing the bigger picture. That's not to say that enjoying a movie can't be directly related to the director's skill in making you feel that way. My philosophy on this matter is as follows: You can enjoy any movie you'd like, but when you begin to call them good or bad, you need to be particularly careful. | ||
|
mOnion
United States5657 Posts
On July 20 2010 02:23 OneOther wrote: Yeah your taste in movies sucks bro oh I get it, the blog title was what we were supposed to post WITHIN the blog i c so clearly now | ||
|
Sephy90
United States1785 Posts
| ||
|
synapse
China13814 Posts
| ||
|
Shaman.us
United States319 Posts
| ||
|
AdamBanks
Canada996 Posts
![[image loading]](http://filmstripcomics.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/The-Wizard.jpg) | ||
|
Pyrrhuloxia
United States6700 Posts
| ||
|
Badjas
Netherlands2038 Posts
| ||
cgrinker
United States3824 Posts
| ||
|
DeathByMonkeys
United States742 Posts
On July 20 2010 01:17 I_Love_Bacon wrote: Ok, ok, perhaps the title was meant to bate you a little. I'm just going to make a list and point out some reasons some popular movies (to one degree or another) are far from the bee's knees. From this blog I'm pretty sure you're in fact the one with a terrible taste in movies. I'd imagine movies along the lines of Transformers and 2012 make it into your top 5. Donnie Darko This emo pile of shit was the bane of my existence my Sophmore year of college. I don't remember how many times people would ask if I've seen it or wanted to. Guess what. Any movie that requires an explanation after the fact to THE BIGGEST THING IN THE STORY is retarded. Oh, you're supposed to watch the director's cut or dig around on their website to learn about his super powers? I came to watch a movie; not do a homework assignment on why Richard Kelly is full of shit. Make no mistake, I am not against having to think about a film to understand it. However, when all of your thinking is proven futile because the facts simply aren't there is merely an insult and waste of my time. Maybe if Gyllenhaal didn't have that stupid look on his face the whole time I wouldn't have been so induced by rage. ![[image loading]](http://i30.tinypic.com/2uhldso.jpg) Donnie Darko was brilliant. I'm sorry you had to squeeze out an ounce of brain power to follow the movie in the slightest. It had a fresh story line that hadn't been seen before. It's a great cult movie that keeps you wondering 'till the end. Also Gyllenhaal's scene with his teacher is down right awesome. The Hangover How far have our expectations of comedies dropped when this thing receives good reviews and makes hundreds of millions at the box office? Oh look, it's Mike Tyson! Oh look, he got tasered! Oh look, there's a tiger in the bathroom! Oh look, there's an asian man in a trunk! Non-stop gags as opposed to actual jokes left me feeling insulted quickly as a movie goer. I wasn't expecting some masterpiece that I'd rewatch repeatedly for the laughs, but I was expecting laughs. Perhaps I was simply raised watching 80's comedies and spoiled for life by doing so... but damn. The Hangover was also fantastic. Sure it's full of slap-stick humor, but that's what made it hilarious, all the random shit that happened. You may sit in front of your computer every Saturday night, but I'm sure a lot of people can relate to this movie too. Waking up in the morning like "What the fuck happened" and then calling your friends so they can regale you with last nights events as you laugh your ass off at some of the crazy shit that happened. Zach Galifinakis is absolutely hilarious in this movie, and I'm looking forward to his new stuff coming out soon. This movie didn't have some kind of deep underlying plot, or acting that will be analyzed for years, or awesome special effects, but it delivered where it counts... a "gag" comedy. The Curious Case of Benjamin Button Jesus Christ. What a fucking snoozefest. Let's take a great movie like Forrest Gump, add a gimmick to it, remove all plot and forgettable characters... and..... ACTION! I haven't fallen asleep in the theaters before but between this and Public Enemies I was damn close. Haven't seen it, but if you say it's bad I may just have to watch it. Requiem for a Dream As somebody who has done more than dabble... I'll just say that I have reason to be attentive when watching this movie. Too bad it's a tired out story I've seen before. I don't care how dark it was or how well Aronosky sets the stage for it all to occur. I will say I am probably too harsh on this movie since I do find myself quoting "Ass to ass!" whenever I'm drunk. But whatever, I didn't like it. I loved Requiem for a Dream. It explores the darkness behind hard drugs instead of taking a "Scary Movie II" approach. It shows you how badly you can fuck up your life when you were sitting on cloud 9 a few weeks back. This movie is friken amazing on all levels there's not much I can say. Scarface Rappers have taste in shitty champagne and shitty movies. I really, really dislike Al Pacino. Perhaps I'm bias on this one for that fact alone. However, if I'm going to watch an actor go overboard on screen for 2 hours I'd rather watch Daniel Day Lewis do it than Pacino. It's plagued by overall bad acting and is about 45 minutes longer than it should be. I find it's talked about like Citizen Kane (relative to its field) that people simply throw its name out at the top of the list without any actual discussion. I blame MTV. Classic, but I guess you're entitled to your opinion. Napoleon Dynamite Worst. Movie. Ever. I actually hated Napoleon Dynamite the first time I watched it (I was around 14), but the second time I watched it (around 18) I thought it was hilarious. This was because I took it too seriously as a comedy the first time around and the second time I just visioned the director trolling everyone and loved the movie. The Professional (Leon) I remember last summer I decided to dig through the IMDB top 100 to see if there were any specific movies listed which I hadn't seen before. This one popped out at me. I got around to watching it and was extremely disappointed. I think a movie that just involved Gary Oldman and Jean Reno playing backgammon and discussing movie roles would have been more entertaining. No matter what happened I simply couldn't put Portman's character out of my mind; and for the story to work you couldn't do that. Good not great, it was definitely worth watching, and I'm tired of arguing with you. Vanilla Sky Ok, I laughed at the cum swallowing joke. Any movie with Kurt Russell deserves to be praised for a decade... he was Captain Ron, dude. Captain. fucking. Ron. That earns him a pass in my book for all time but even he couldn't save this shit pile of a movie. The whole movie just didn't work. I sat here on this paragraph for some time trying to think of why I didn't enjoy the movie and then I realized that as a whole it simply fell flat. Too long, unenjoyable experience, ultimately pointless... I wanted to call it pretentious but I feel people use that term too often when describing films they didn't like even if it does fit this particular film. I feel like I'm forgetting some major names on my list but I could always revisit it. Noticeably lacking from my list is Titanic but I figured on a forum such as this that particular film wouldn't be as well received anyways.[/QUOTE] | ||
|
traced
1739 Posts
requiem for a dream was a bad movie because of its poseur aesthetic and the moralization of the movie. there was only the surface layer to the movie, which was glossy, and is what fans found entertaining. by no means an indicator of bad taste if someone likes this, but i find that its most vocal fans are high school students or younger, and those that revist it tend to like it less. scarface is a silly gangster movie. i find the amount of love it gets odd too, but i think it's more about the lifestyle than the actual movie. but gangster movies are literally the most entertaining genre, and the movie has a bunch of really cool and memorable scenes (quoted ad infinitum), even if a lot of the movie drags, even if it isn't one of the top gangster films. napoleon dynamite was pretty funny but it's in large part responsible for the indie targeted trash films that the studios churn out now. and for that i will never forgive it. the professional is basically another gangster movie but it's fucking awesome. to be honest that's more your taste in movies than everyone else's. vanilla sky was basically "the idiots guide to layered filmmaking!" we get it, the second layer is the formative rock and roll experience of the 1960s/70s The fact that you negate the strength of Pacino's acting in Scarface, in a time period where acting hasn't been scrutinized like it is today, shows that you have no value of innovation relative to time period in cinematic development. We've only started expecting great performances out of our actors in the last decade or so. ........ what are you talking about the development of film in the last decade has been the use of the artificial 3d camera (not the 3d eyeglass effect) and the reflection of altered perception/realities through the construction of the narrative, not noticing whether the actors can act well, aha and i mean pacino is great at rage acting but there are many other actors that are better overall, have better range or are better at subtlety, etc. in every single time period of film, before and after. | ||
|
jon arbuckle
Canada443 Posts
On July 20 2010 04:36 traced wrote:vanilla sky was basically "the idiots guide to layered filmmaking!" we get it, the second layer is the formative rock and roll experience of the 1960s/70s Pretty sure it's also Cameron Crowe at his most self-indulgent. Self-pitying superficial meditations on being baby boomers by and for baby boomers. | ||
|
traced
1739 Posts
| ||
|
Exteray
United States1094 Posts
| ||
|
Pathology
Canada132 Posts
| ||
|
jon arbuckle
Canada443 Posts
On July 20 2010 04:43 traced wrote: yeah i've only seen like 45 minutes of it and it was just stupid. it's a shame because i loved almost famous too, even if it that was self-indulgent too Almost Famous makes up for it by being a sweet brodown fantasy movie for anyone who really likes music. | ||
|
fly.stat
United States449 Posts
On July 20 2010 04:36 traced wrote: ........ what are you talking about the development of film in the last decade has been the use of the artificial 3d camera (not the 3d eyeglass effect) and the reflection of altered perception/realities through the construction of the narrative, not noticing whether the actors can act well, aha and i mean pacino is great at rage acting but there are many other actors that are better overall, have better range or are better at subtlety, etc. in every single time period of film, before and after. ...Because I said the ONLY development was pressure on actors to perform well. Also because all pacino did was rage in that movie, and because I said he was the greatest actor of all time. Yep, I'm done with this thread. | ||
| ||
