Almost every live action adaptation of any classic animated movie.
Avatar. Highest grossing movie in the world. Blue shit.
Gravity.
Literally the only movie I’ve ever turned off part way through. Youd think that the producers would have, i don’t know, accurately depicted the force the movie is named after.
Mind to elaborate?
Sure thing!
The scene where George Clooney dies is just stupid wrong. https://youtu.be/9La4T6GBsLA?si=3TaChBLOqGRSzX5n
Once Sandra catches his broken teather he comes to a complete stop. The line is taught, so effectively they’re both moving in roughly the same orbit as the station they’re attached to. That means they’re also moving at the same speed as the station. The net forces at that point for Clooney’s character are effectively zero (not exactly zero as there is still a bit of atmosphere causing drag at iss heights).
In real life, he’s “safe” in that scenario. In the movie, some magical force continues to be applied to him which ends up overpowering his grip, which was totally fine seconds before, and he falls to his death.
I dont know if the science gets better after that, never watched past it.
I see where you are coming from.
I would interpret that as still some residual force being there but dampened by the parachute lines (meaning a ruler would still see movement relative to the station) and thr amount of screen time couldnt show them drifting away from the station. This would be confirmed by the taut line and the “recoil” after Clooney let loose.
But the force for the amount of time shown is still too much to be logical.
Any superhero movie since 2008.
into the Spider-Verse has redifined what studios are willing to do in animated movies.
I guess it was a pretty broad stroke and there is some collateral damage. I might look into this one.
Its truly beautiful. The writing is a little wonky but the second one is written much better. I would recommend waiting for the third one to release if you want to watch thay one though because it is very much a part of a non complete whole at the moment.
The Dark Knight Rises. Not only is it a bad Batman movie, it oddly has a pro cop message. Also, I can’t take Bane seriously at all with that ridiculous voice.
All of Nolan’s Batman movies were heavily pro-cop. Watch TDK again: the day is saved by illegal surveillance, and Batman faces no consequences for using it.
Prior to Rises, most of the Gotham cops were depicted as extremely corrupt, though. Gordon was something of an exception, although even he looked the other way for his corrupt co-workers
That’s a valid point. I just remembered the pro-cop messaging feeling more overt in Rises, though it has been a while since I’ve seen them all.
I also have a soft spot for The Dark Knight because of Ledger’s performance.
This is how I felt about all the Nolan Batman movies, except it was Batman himself I couldn’t take seriously because of Bale’s ridiculous Cookie Monster voice. I think I burst out laughing in the theatre when I first heard it.
any of the new MCU movies post-endgame. they were so generic, and it was clear some of the movies ran out of money on cgi or animation.
Mad Max: Fury Road. I thought that was dumbest, most caveman pleasing trash that has ever received that much acclaim. Truly, the entire movie is designed to make a caveman go, “OOhhhH!.. WwAaHh!.. FFIIRE!.. DwWoOah!.. HaHhh!.. OOhhhH! LaDy!!..HhaHh!.. MAD!!..WoOoHhh!”
Thank you. I saw it, and it was one of the most boring movies I’d seen in spite of all the effects being thrown at me. Mind you, I went into it having watched Mad Max & Road Warrior hours before, and having skipped Thunderdome (and Waterworld). In all honesty, Fury Road is just “what if we actually made Waterworld the Mad Max sequel it was obviously supposed to be?”
I enjoyed it. Great cinematography and practical effects. My wife? Not so much. She broke it down as… “oh look! They drove away! Then the drove back! The end! That was the whole movie!”
UNGA BUUUNGA!!! >:O
I thought that when it was my first mad max film. Going back to the first one I thought it was amazing.
Pulp Fiction 🤷♀️
citizen kane. I mean I get it. If you geek out on cinematography history and the first of doing stuff but its just plain boring.
For me I just feel like I’m not equipped to judge it. I haven’t lived in the time period it first came out in and I’ve enjoyed the options of thousands of different forms of entertainment at my whim for most of my life (mid 30s). I imagine when there were far fewer things going on and options to choose from you might see this movie in a whole different light.
All that being said I like some older movies just fine, like Harvey which came out 9 years later, so maybe my judgement is fine and Citizen Kane is boring as fuck. 🤷
Lucas directed Star Wars. Any. He’s an awful director in almost every aspect. Some of the worst acting from extremely talented people I’ve ever seen because he doesn’t know how to direct them.
Take the same cast, story, massage the script, and have ANYONE else direct, and it’d be great. I just can’t with Lucas.
Jupiter Ascending
That was a pretty roundly panned movie.
And yet… I know someone who loved it, sadly
Have they watched it more than once? I actually thought it was okay after watching it the first time, despite the confusing plot and a bunch of minor characters I just couldn’t keep straight. So I decided it was worth another watch so I could pick up more of the story, but instead the second viewing was just painful as I ended up realizing how terrible and nonsensical the movie was.
I know they did and still liked it. I wasn’t able to finish it on the second round. Some moments are amusing and some are interesting, but it just wasn’t enough to keep me hooked.
I don’t really get the hype for Citizen Kane.
Though, I kinda think it might be because growing up, this movie was spoiled in almost every cartoon I ever saw (“Rosebud” was the punchline of so many jokes) and maybe not knowing the ending would have made it better. 🤷🏻♂️
A lot of the hype was in the metanarrative around the movie - remember that it bombed in theaters and was only carried to far later acclaim. Newspaper journalists loved the fact that it called out one of their worst nightmares (W.R. Hearst) in very specific ways. Then the cinematographers caught all the tech that Welles used and tried to figure out how to make it all work for them. Actors loved it because it was a lot of great character work. ‘Film buffs’ started to enjoy it thereafter, in part because it had inspiration from films like Rashomon. Then you have the auteur directors who will always love Orson Welles, in spite of everything and anything against doing so. Mercury Theatre on the Air fans also liked the movie because it shared a lot of the same cast (and was only 3 years out from that show).
I’ll admit, that’s where I came at it from. My family was in papers, and was in a paper that actively fought the Hearst syndicate; one of the characters in the movie has elements of my grandfather in him, because he made sure to have people go into NYC to review Mercury Theatre productions and thus Welles cared about him as an editor. And then my experience having gotten briefly into stage and screen: The performances are amazing. Many of the sets are so perfectly evocative that they become a character unto themselves. The montages are technically inspiring to this day, and the scene transitions are pure technical excellence.
That’s just what makes Kane good as a film.
The plot is one of a death-mystery of a ‘great’ man, of trying to approach a man’s life and sum him up in just a few inches of text on a page. While Rosebud is the butt of jokes (and may well have been a nasty jab at Marion Davies), it’s more of a chilling point. The point is not about the thing itself. It’s the treatment of the thing. It’s the last thing he thought about, and the whole movie is a quest to figure out what it “means” - and no one finds out, even though they spend this whole film exploring who the man was from vignettes of his existence. In the end, if it meant anything but a fleeting final thought, it still just goes in the furnace with the rest of his identity that can’t be sold off at auction. It didn’t define him, not really - in spite of what the editor in the smoke-filled newsroom wanted to push as his narrative. One word is never enough to define a person who lived a full life. But a full life that ended up hurting a lot of people is best defined by the wreckage left behind (human and junk). A drunk ex-wife, dead children, a disgraced media empire, a half-built house full of stuff for the furnace, and most painfully, no true friends to really speak well of him.
That’s what makes Citizen Kane good as a movie.
So I’ll say this - Rosebud is meaningless. It’s a cheap parlor trick of misdirection, and like all such tricks people latched onto it. Instead, ask yourself something when you’re watching that movie. When you’re gone, what will you leave behind? And what will you do, starting right this moment, to leave behind the legacy you want?
Avatar
Mid story, great visuals.
Absolutely this.
Yes! It’s just cowboys vs Indians over valuable rocks in the ground on a alien planet.
BladeRunner - is like they wrote the screenplay based on the excellent source novel, then cut most of the ideas out, leaving only things that make no sense. Rick Deckard is a terrible detective, and only wins the final confrontation because Roy Batty… just gives up? I recently decided that my teenage self might have been wrong and rewatched it… nah, still terrible.
The Big Lebowsky
That’s a rough one. Everyone ever loves it… I completely do not get it.
