State your unpopular film related opinion - Part 6

[CelticPredator]

Me too. Nolan did his thing, and someone else should do theirs.

[El Payaso]

I didn't think Superman Returns was all that bad. Sure, it's nowhere near as good as the first half of the 1978 Superman film, and yeah, the whole Superman's son sub plot was stupid, but I thought the Plane scene was easily some of the best Superhero cinema out there. I'd say it was definitely worth the entire film being made for that one scene.

I didn't think Superman Returns was bad at all. I mean, I'd have erased STM quotes and would have expanded on why Superman left. The only thing I didn't really like was Superman not saying good-bye to Lois. It was not necessary. They could have had a bitter good-bye with Lois very resentful on him leaving and it would have been the same.

I haven't seen the movie in years since I saw it way too many times around 2006-2007, but last time SR was my second favourite Superman movie.

Now feel free to elaborate on why Superman having a son is stupid exactly. My favourite scene, which shows more heart than many superhero movies, is when Superman gives a moving speech about how to grow up being different, not knowing it was the same speech his father gave to him. Made me think baby Kal-El unawarely heard that speech and had it in his subconscious.


I would have liked it more, if it wasn't for the whole "a tiny bit of kryptonite is supposed to be poison to Superman, but he can endure standing on a massive chunk of kryptonite land, while picking it up, and throwing it into space" angle.

Well, the Kryptonite was the core of the chunk - the rest was dirt and crystals - and it only affected Superman after a while, when the spikes came out of the chunk. Luthor created "New Krypton" mixing a crystal and kryptonite.



Yea, the "realism" fanboys do my head in. **** realism, i'm not a fan of Batman because he's a realistic superhero, because he isn't. And anyone who thinks he is needs their brain examined.

Give me a surreal, nightmarish Batman movie by Fincher or Del Toro or someone. Maybe based on Arkham Asylum: Serious House on Serious Earth.

[ThDWgeek]

Actually, that was a good speech. To be fair, I think my biggest problem with it is the idea of it, not how it was done. It just feels out of character for Superman to abandon any child, especially his own, even if he did it unintentionally. Plus, while nobody outright lied about it, letting James Marsden's character think he was the father seems to go against the core tenant of "truth, justice, and the American way", though that could just be me looking into things too deeply.

[Cuyan]

I find Scarlett Johansson to be boring and of average looks.

[A Necessary Evil]

I find Scarlett Johansson to be boring and of average looks.


http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lti7weBwNz1qcq603.gif

[El Payaso]

Actually, that was a good speech. To be fair, I think my biggest problem with it is the idea of it, not how it was done. It just feels out of character for Superman to abandon any child, especially his own, even if he did it unintentionally. Plus, while nobody outright lied about it, letting James Marsden's character think he was the father seems to go against the core tenant of "truth, justice, and the American way", though that could just be me looking into things too deeply.

That tenant is quite stupid to start with. There are too many contradictions within it to be held as congruent. To me, the story developed in SR is better than some cliche 1940's failed ideal. Same as life.

[CJ]

I liked the Dukes of Hazzard movie.

I went into it expecting it to suck, and from my low expectations, I managed to enjoy it. The car chase scenes were very well done. The story? Yeah it's pretty dumb. The writing? Yeah, that too. But I think the movie is good mindless "turn off your brain" fun.

[gwynplaine]

Halloween themed unpopular opinions:

_ I enjoyed most of the Saw movies.
_ I also enjoyed both Hostel films.
_ I kinda liked the 1st Paranormal Activity, I didn't like the 2nd one and I'm looking forward to seeing the 3rd one, but probably not in the theater.
_ I love The Exorcist, but I don't think it's the greatest horror movie of all time. I much prefer The Shining, The Thing, Alien, heck even the original Nightmare on Elm Street.
_ My favorite zombie movies are 28 Days Later (I know not technically a zombie movie, but I don't care), The Return of the Living Dead, Shaun of the Dead, Day of the Dead, Dawn of the Dead, Night of the Living Dead (Romero's, in that order) and I also enjoyed Zombieland. I have high hopes for Juan of the Dead that I'm really looking forward to seeing (more than World War Z.)
_ Frank Henenlotter and William Lustig should get more recognition. Specially Henenlotter.

[Blitzkrieg Bop]

Christopher Walken as Captain Koons is the greatest casting decision ever made.

[Secret Fawful]

Wes Craven's The People Under the Stairs is a great flick, possibly my second favorite from him.

[Jordacar]

Michael Myers shouldn't have come back after Halloween III.

[HighFivingMF]

Halloween movies from greatest to least:

Halloween
Rob Zombie's Halloween
Rob Zombie's H2
Halloween 2
Halloween 4: The Return of Michael Myers
Halloween H20
Halloween: The Curse of Michael Myers (come on, it's got Paul Rudd being a badass.)
Halloween 3: Season of the Witch
Halloween Resurrection
Halloween 5: The Revenge of Michael Myers

[Figs]

Wes Craven's The People Under the Stairs is a great flick, possibly my second favorite from him.

:up:

"BURN IN HELL!!"

[Eddie Dean]

Halloween 3 is the best Halloween movie.

Tom Atkins' Mustache >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Everything Else

[Rowsdower!]

My Halloween unpopular opinions...

There has never been a good Friday the 13th movie, even by bad horror movie standards. Every single ones of those films is terrible, including the first one.

The remake of Texas Chainsaw Massacre was a better movie than the original. The original is barely watchable, other than for MST3K purposes. Seriously, I can't see why anyone was ever scared of that movie. And don't give me that "It was the 70's, how could you expect the movie to be good?" crap. They made plenty of good movies with good acting, good writing and good directing in the 70's, the 60's, the 50's, etc. I don't see why horror movies always seem to get a pass.

Speaking of the 70's, I think Duel (Speilberg's debut film) is one of the scariest, most underrated thrillers of all time.

[Cuyan]

I completely agree with your Texas Chainsaw sentiments. :up:

[the_ultimate_evil]

i never liked Michael Myers as a character, never found him scary. freddy is a demon, jason is an undead monster. myers is just a guy with a sister fetish and dont bring up that moronic cult ********

i also never seen the point of saying he should face the other 2 they would just kill him

[HighFivingMF]

i also never seen the point of saying he should face the other 2 they would just kill him

Jason and Freddy have actually died a few times and come back. Michael's survived being shot off of a balcony, blown up, shot dozens of time down a mineshaft, beat senseless with a board, filled with multiple syringes full of sedatives and a head-bashing with a metal pipe, everything Laurie did to him in H20 up until he switched places, and getting burned to a crisp. Michael hasn't died once, Jason and Freddy have died several times and would have stayed that way if some kid didn't accidentally stumble into resurrecting them. Michael is a force. Pure evil, not to mention a crafty son of a ***** on top of it.

[Rowsdower!]

I completely agree with your Texas Chainsaw sentiments. :up:

Cool, glad I'm not alone in that. :word:

[Rowsdower!]

i never liked Michael Myers as a character, never found him scary. freddy is a demon, jason is an undead monster. myers is just a guy with a sister fetish and dont bring up that moronic cult ********

i also never seen the point of saying he should face the other 2 they would just kill him

I find Michael Myers -- in the original Halloween -- one of the scariest "horror heroes" because someone so hollow and dead inside that would kill anyone without a second thought is a scary thing, and something that could actually exist.

However, as the sequels came, Michael ceased to be scary because he become indestructable, and that takes the "real" aspect out of it. In the first film, he gets banged up and eventually shot and knocked out a window (and still gets away). That, of course, might not be very realistic, but nothing that happened to him in that film felt like too big of a stretch of the imaginations. They ruined it though with all of the ludicrous sh** that happened in the sequels.

[moviedoors]

Now feel free to elaborate on why Superman having a son is stupid exactly.

The idea isn't inherently stupid, but it was weak in the movie. The kid existed entirely as a plot device to add some friction to a barely there drama. He had a personality that consisted of breathing louder when things got exciting and staring bewildered. The rest of the time he was being the convenient child-in-peril, the next moment the convenient Deus ex Machina, and then inexplicably he'd be back to child-in-peril. Really poor character, very poorly written. Newt this kid was not.

[gwynplaine]

My Halloween unpopular opinions...

There has never been a good Friday the 13th movie, even by bad horror movie standards. Every single ones of those films is terrible, including the first one.

The remake of Texas Chainsaw Massacre was a better movie than the original. The original is barely watchable, other than for MST3K purposes. Seriously, I can't see why anyone was ever scared of that movie. And don't give me that "It was the 70's, how could you expect the movie to be good?" crap. They made plenty of good movies with good acting, good writing and good directing in the 70's, the 60's, the 50's, etc. I don't see why horror movies always seem to get a pass.

Speaking of the 70's, I think Duel (Speilberg's debut film) is one of the scariest, most underrated thrillers of all time.
I agree. I love Duel. One of Spielberg's best. It would probably make a great double feature with the original Hitcher film, another great underrated road thriller.
As for the TCM, i haven't seen it in a very long time and it's probably extremely dated by now. But I remember the dinner scene, a few other ones and specially Leatherface "chainsaw dance" at the end the film and thought it was pretty powerful stuff back then.

[SuperFerret]

Scream is the only good movie Wes Craven's ever made.

[Secret Fawful]

I like the Scream series, but mostly for Dewey. Fool is my favorite of Wes Craven's protagonists, though. As far as monsters, I prefer Freddy, but I just plain love cheesiness, although I hated Freddy's Dead, and consider the first the scariest. I love two, three, and four. I agree with the sentiments about Friday the 13th. I don't get the appeal, and I almost fell asleep watching the first one. I'd have preferred Freddy vs. Michael than Freddy Vs. Jason. It makes more sense since early on they're both compared to the Boogeyman. I've said this before, but I wish Halloween 1 had been the first and last we saw of Michael.

On an unrelated note, the scene in Addams Family Values where Wednesday forces a hideous smile and scares all of the other campers is one of the greatest scenes of all time.

[gwynplaine]

The original Nightmare on Elm Street is a great movie. Is that like an unpopular opinion now?

[Secret Fawful]

Not so much that as it was directly related to what I was saying. Oh, here's another unpopular opinion. I love Star Trek: The Motion Picture.

[Abaddon]

Akira was crap. Incoherent mess.

[Thebumwhowalks]

Not so much that as it was directly related to what I was saying. Oh, here's another unpopular opinion. I love Star Trek: The Motion Picture.

I think I would pretty much need a pen and paper to draw during that film, and/or a newspaper/comic/book. I want to like it, but it just gets so ponderous that it drifts into the realm of flat out boring.
I prefer Star Trek V to I, III and VI, I guess that might be a little unpopular.

[bullets]

There has never been a good Friday the 13th movie, even by bad horror movie standards. Every single ones of those films is terrible, including the first one.



The first one actually scared me at the end when Jason pops out of the water. I just liked watching the rest for the kills. Since these films really cater to that it's hard to hold them to a high standard.

[Homer J. Fong]

On an unrelated note, the scene in Addams Family Values where Wednesday forces a hideous smile and scares all of the other campers is one of the greatest scenes of all time.

Yes.

[Homer J. Fong]

Michael Myers shouldn't have come back after Halloween III.

Well, it would have been nice to see that "horror series linked only by the Halloween holiday" idea go on, get more chances - 'course, I can see why it didn't, because Halloween III was such a misfire.

[Parker Wayne]

Plus you already built the series based on Mike Myers as the villain.

[The Morningstar]

The first Halloween is the only good one. I preferred it when Myers wasn't related to Laurie. Him being made her brother humanised him, he worked better as just some mysterious force of evil who had no motives or purpose for doing what he was doing.

[Homer J. Fong]

I don't know that it humanized him - it's still pretty bloody monstrous to try so persistently to kill your sister - but it's awfully soap opera, and not really in the good way. Still, I don't dislike it myself, because I think H20 works well.

[TheWiseGuy487]

Akira was crap. Incoherent mess.

While I don't agree that it was crap, it wasn't the best that it could have been. There's so much material from the manga to cover, but due to the runtime, things had to be excised. As a result though, certain things suffer. Characters don't get developed very well (Who exactly are the Espers, what is Kei's purpose, who is Akira, etc., what is Kaneda's relationship with Tetsuo?), situations aren't explained (what's up Tetsuo exploding and turning into a universe at the end?), some things just don't make any sense (Why the heck does Tetsuo develop so fast?), and it just kind of ends.

In spite of this, I love this film for the fact that it's animated at 24 frames per second, which is normal for films in the U.S., but a rarity in Japanese animation. So, it's animated like many hand-drawn Disney films, but it does all this crazy, graphic and disturbing stuff that none of our films would do in that format. :woot:

If you ever get the chance, you should read the manga, which is 6 volumes long. As a result, it's not as crazy, and it's so much better written and makes much more sense than the anime. And the ending is much more satisfying.

Anyways, back to the original topic.

[hammerhedd11]

I'm probably one of the few that thinks the film version of Akira surpasses the manga. The manga is a much more straightforward apocalyptic action thriller which, while I found it very entertaining, left me a little cold in the end. True, the film is a lot more vague on many details, but you are able to get the gist of it even w/o reading the manga. Overall, I just found the film to be much more interesting in that it took a more intimate approach. The manga deals with dozens and dozens of characters, but the film mostly focuses on Kaneda and Tetsuo, and we get to know them better. It made Akira more mysterious as well. We never really see him except in flashbacks in the movie, but we spend ample time with him in the manga. The movie made him feel much more god-like and divine; he was literally part of the cosmos. I think making the movie more open-ended and open to interpretation made it much more thought-provoking. There's a lot of themes in the manga as well, but the book kinda lays out what happens. I also think its a mistake to think its a straight adaptation of the manga as well; it's more of an alternate version (considering it was directed by the author), so I don't think its fair to compare it to what it doesn't ever really intend to be.

[hammerhedd11]

The first Halloween is the only good one. I preferred it when Myers wasn't related to Laurie. Him being made her brother humanised him, he worked better as just some mysterious force of evil who had no motives or purpose for doing what he was doing.

Completely agree. And even then, I'm not that big of a fan of it. I know it did a lot for the genre, but I don't find it particularly scary, in fact, I find it kind it humorous when Myers continues to not die.

[hammerhedd11]

The remake of Texas Chainsaw Massacre was a better movie than the original. The original is barely watchable, other than for MST3K purposes. Seriously, I can't see why anyone was ever scared of that movie. And don't give me that "It was the 70's, how could you expect the movie to be good?" crap. They made plenty of good movies with good acting, good writing and good directing in the 70's, the 60's, the 50's, etc. I don't see why horror movies always seem to get a pass.


I agree as well. The protagonists were horrible too, especially the guy in the wheelchair. And I don't understand how people could ever prefer a version of anything that didn't have R. Lee Ermey in it.

[Number 6]

-I never cared much for James Bond films. They always seemed kind of boring and I could never get into them. The only one I think I legitimately like is Casino Royale, but even that I feel is kind of overrated overall.

-I liked Star Trek, but I don't know, I kind of prefer the idea for a TV show. Outside a couple of exceptions, I kind of feel that way about all of the older movies, too.

-I like Avatar, like a lot. That's probably not really an unpopular opinion since it's the biggest movie of all time, but it seems to be mixed with internet crowds. But I guess to up the ante, I think anyone who uses 'it's Dance in Wolves in space' as a criticism should probably never be allowed to ever talk about movies again.

[SuperFerret]

It's not Dances with Wolves in space. It's Fern Gully in space, big difference.

[Wesley Dodds]

It's only a little complaint here but as good as Inception is, the ambiguous tone of the ending was completely unnecessary. I cant help but think if the spinning top stopped spinning and rolled off the table it would have been much better. Beautiful, even. It'd nicely put across the idea that Cobb's story is over, y'know? He can get on with his life...

[Number 6]

It's not Dances with Wolves in space. It's Fern Gully in space, big difference.

Big difference, same mind numbing stupidity.

[hammerhedd11]

People who say Quantum of Solace is the worst Bond film ever, or even close to the worst, are either delusional or have not seen Moonraker, Die Another Day, Diamonds are forever etc.

[Parker Wayne]

You Only Live Twice was not a bad Bond movie. It's incredibly unfaithful to the original novel, but it's not bad.

And how could name worst Bond movies without mention of the worst of them all: The Man With The Golden Gun?

[Parker Wayne]

It's only a little complaint here but as good as Inception is, the ambiguous tone of the ending was completely unnecessary. I cant help but think if the spinning top stopped spinning and rolled off the table it would have been much better. Beautiful, even. It'd nicely put across the idea that Cobb's story is over, y'know? He can get on with his life...

Looking back, Inception ending really felt forced. Even after I left the theater I was like, "There's no way he's still dreaming. There's so much proof that he made it back."

[Why Are You Crouching Spock?]

Moonraker is awsome. Way more fun than these new edgy bonds with old craggy face.

[Cuyan]

Moonraker is awsome.
This is the most appropriate post in the thread.

[Blitzkrieg Bop]

I've never been a real Bond fan. Casino Royale is the only one I've ever genuinely liked.

[The Morningstar]

Big difference, same mind numbing stupidity.

Whether Avatar is derivative or not (it is) it's still crap. The characters in it are so one dimensional and cliche it's hilarious. Especially the main bad guy General.

And the films message is basically "if you're not a tree hugger you're an *******". I find that insulting.

[hammerhedd11]

Moonraker is awsome. Way more fun than these new edgy bonds with old craggy face.

"New" edgy bonds? Moonraker is nothing like James Bond at all. The Craig Bonds are much closer in every single way to the novels.

Also, are serious, well told stories with realistic characters not fun anymore? I like to have fun w/o having my brain turn into putty. Seriously, past all nostalgia, most of Roger Moore movies are akin to Adam West's Batman; it's fun to look back on in a "oh that's cute" way, but seriously, you prefer cartoon characters whipping out horrible double entendres every second and shooting at each other with lasers over a story with actual human emotion and depth?
Where there's real things at stake? Gee, I'll take boredom over fun everyday then.

[hammerhedd11]

You Only Live Twice was not a bad Bond movie. It's incredibly unfaithful to the original novel, but it's not bad.

And how could name worst Bond movies without mention of the worst of them all: The Man With The Golden Gun?

I don't know, Sean Connery getting all squinty eyed is one of the dumbest things I've ever seen.

[hammerhedd11]

I can also never take anyone seriously who ever says a movie made in the last 5 years is the "worst movie ever." I feel that at this point in time, even horrible horrible movies are at the worst just really stupid and/or bland. Even really terrible movies nowadays at least have good production values and pretty special effects to somewhat entertain. When I hear people saying The Last Airbender, or Spiderman 3 or even some bland romcom, I really want to say that they don't know how lucky they have it. I mean, nothing comes close to Monster a Go Go, or Bride of the Monster, or Manos; horrible s**t that is just incomprehensible.
When people resort to that I have to assume that they have never seen a movie past the 1990's. Seriously. Watch any episode of MST3K and you'll always know how good you have it. Even a mind numbingly idiotic movie at least has some car crashes and pretty explosions. Some of these movies I've stated above can't even stage a coherent shot.

[Travesty]

-I like Avatar, like a lot. That's probably not really an unpopular opinion since it's the biggest movie of all time, but it seems to be mixed with internet crowds.

http://i1193.photobucket.com/albums/aa353/Travesty70077/3-DealWithIt.gif

[Why Are You Crouching Spock?]

"New" edgy bonds? Moonraker is nothing like James Bond at all. The Craig Bonds are much closer in every single way to the novels.

I don't care. Nor do I buy the argument that it being closer is better. The shining is nothing like the original source material, Space Oddesy 2001 and Lord Of The Rings trilogy. Both Casino Royal and Quantum Of Solace are simply not fun to me at all. It has none of the charm or movies like moonraker or the man with the golden gun. Zany villiams, one liners full of lolz. The ending with bond banging a woman. Hell man, it's so fricking boring I can barely remember any of it. A villain died of not getting water or something? In the man with the golden gun, he's tricked with a fake manikin in a duel to the death on a super-villain island of doom! I remember that since I was a child because that was actually awsome. Bro, the new bonds are boring.

[gwynplaine]

"We Bought a Zoo" looks really bad.

[gwynplaine]

You Only Live Twice is a great Bond movie. Granted Connery as a Japanese man was really ridiculous and unintentionally funny, but still a great Bond movie nonetheless.
Moonraker and Golden Gun on the other hand, really terrible. Moore made only two good Bond films LALD and TSWLM. (There were some good moments in Octopussy too.)

[gwynplaine]

-I never cared much for James Bond films. They always seemed kind of boring and I could never get into them. The only one I think I legitimately like is Casino Royale, but even that I feel is kind of overrated overall.

-I liked Star Trek, but I don't know, I kind of prefer the idea for a TV show. Outside a couple of exceptions, I kind of feel that way about all of the older movies, too.

-I like Avatar, like a lot. That's probably not really an unpopular opinion since it's the biggest movie of all time, but it seems to be mixed with internet crowds. But I guess to up the ante, I think anyone who uses 'it's Dance in Wolves in space' as a criticism should probably never be allowed to ever talk about movies again.
:up:
Avatar is awesome. Much, much better than Ferngully or Dances with Wolves.
3 posts in a row, sorry:o:woot:

[Sloth7d]

But better than Pochahontas?... Okay, yeah, that too. But "Colors of the Wind" is still the most awesome of awesomnest awesomeness.:awesome:

[Why Are You Crouching Spock?]

You Only Live Twice is a great Bond movie. Granted Connery as a Japanese man was really ridiculous and unintentionally funny, but still a great Bond movie nonetheless.
Moonraker and Golden Gun on the other hand, really terrible. Moore made only two good Bond films LALD and TSWLM. (There were some good moments in Octopussy too.)

I'd say thats probably a popular opinion.
Most Bond fans prefer connery/connery movies.

[hammerhedd11]

I don't care. Nor do I buy the argument that it being closer is better. The shining is nothing like the original source material, Space Oddesy 2001 and Lord Of The Rings trilogy. Both Casino Royal and Quantum Of Solace are simply not fun to me at all. It has none of the charm or movies like moonraker or the man with the golden gun. Zany villiams, one liners full of lolz. The ending with bond banging a woman. Hell man, it's so fricking boring I can barely remember any of it. A villain died of not getting water or something? In the man with the golden gun, he's tricked with a fake manikin in a duel to the death on a super-villain island of doom! I remember that since I was a child because that was actually awsome. Bro, the new bonds are boring.

Well, at least you admit you don't want anything of substance in your films.

Edit: Whoa, whoa, whoa. 2001 is nothing like the book? Huh? It follows it almost completely word for word.

[Why Are You Crouching Spock?]

Well, at least you admit you don't want anything of substance in your films.

James Bond movies are not "all films" and no, I couldn't care less as long as it's enjoyable. I'm sure quite a few people would have a similar attitude towards you and Battle Royal. Actually, in many ways (doom island, zany villains, duel to the death) it has alot in common with the more goofy Bond movies. One of the differences though, is that Roger Moores James Bond character is almost self aware to the point of breaking the fourth wall. In fact, in some cases he directly looks at the camera acknowledging the viewer. In Battle Royal it comes across as funny, not because it's meant to be funny but because the actors and melodrama are terrible.

[The Morningstar]

I love Casino Royale. But I also love the old Roger Moore Bond films. Especially Live and Let Die.

[Why Are You Crouching Spock?]

I love Casino Royale. But I also love the old Roger Moore Bond films. Especially Live and Let Die.

Lets best the best movie ever made (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=czWLEbNwjCI) :awesome:

[Parker Wayne]

Moonraker is awsome. Way more fun than these new edgy bonds with old craggy face.

Eh..... Moonraker wasn't that good to me. The first hour of the movie jumps all over the place and gets pretty dull at times.

I will admit the space battles were cool looking, but the Hugo Drax's plot.... Goes beyond cartoony and insane that they haven't made a word for it.

"New" edgy bonds? Moonraker is nothing like James Bond at all. The Craig Bonds are much closer in every single way to the novels.

Also, are serious, well told stories with realistic characters not fun anymore? I like to have fun w/o having my brain turn into putty. Seriously, past all nostalgia, most of Roger Moore movies are akin to Adam West's Batman; it's fun to look back on in a "oh that's cute" way, but seriously, you prefer cartoon characters whipping out horrible double entendres every second and shooting at each other with lasers over a story with actual human emotion and depth?
Where there's real things at stake? Gee, I'll take boredom over fun everyday then.

Eh..... I think people overexaggerate Roger Moore's movies. The only really ridiculous ones are MWTGG, Moonraker, and a View to a Kill. The Spy Who Loved Me is on the fences, and Octopussy along with For Your Eyes Only are pretty grounded.

And The Spy Who Loved Me is one of the best Bond movies. In fact, I put it behind Goldfinger, Goldeneye, and From Russia With Love (in that order) in terms of favorite Bond movies.

I don't care. Nor do I buy the argument that it being closer is better. The shining is nothing like the original source material, Space Oddesy 2001 and Lord Of The Rings trilogy. Both Casino Royal and Quantum Of Solace are simply not fun to me at all. It has none of the charm or movies like moonraker or the man with the golden gun. Zany villiams, one liners full of lolz. The ending with bond banging a woman. Hell man, it's so fricking boring I can barely remember any of it. A villain died of not getting water or something? In the man with the golden gun, he's tricked with a fake manikin in a duel to the death on a super-villain island of doom! I remember that since I was a child because that was actually awsome. Bro, the new bonds are boring.

Man With The Golden Gun? Really?

The Man With The Golden Gun is one of the most uninspired, boring movies I've seen in my life. Christopher Lee seems to be the only one having fun. Roger Moore looks more bored than Connery ever was in any of his later movies. Scarmanga's plot is boring, and one of the coolest stunts in film history is ruined by that stupid sound effect.

I'm glad Roger Moore more than made up for it with The Spy Who Loved Me.

However, I do agree that Craig's Bond movies could be more fun. That's why I don't hold Casino Royale as up there with the others. I still look at highly, but it's not in my top 5 Bond movies (it's #6 :woot:).

[Secret Fawful]

Try On Her Majesty's Secret Service. Just check it out. I'm curious of your thoughts on it.

[Why Are You Crouching Spock?]

I like what they done with Jaws in Moonraker.
Appprently they got letters from kids who liked the character (a gaint murderer who bites peoples knecks) and decided to make him become a good guy with a happy ending.

[JAK®]

Well, at least you admit you don't want anything of substance in your films.
New Bond hasn't demonstrated any inherent substance. Casino Royale was great, but it's also based on a Fleming novel, so the story is more intricate than the formulaic Bonds that just copy the Goldfinger plot. It had a lot more backing it up.

Quantum of Solace, however, was just as vapid as the campiest Moore-era films. Just replace camp with brooding grimdark action. The death of Mathis and placing his body in a dustbin was the modern-day equivalent of the slide-whistle car stunt in Live and Let Die.

[hammerhedd11]

New Bond hasn't demonstrated any inherent substance. Casino Royale was great, but it's also based on a Fleming novel, so the story is more intricate than the formulaic Bonds that just copy the Goldfinger plot. It had a lot more backing it up.

Quantum of Solace, however, was just as vapid as the campiest Moore-era films. Just replace camp with brooding grimdark action. The death of Mathis and placing his body in a dustbin was the modern-day equivalent of the slide-whistle car stunt in Live and Let Die.

Really? I found there to be at least a point for that Mathis scene; after Bond loses everything he cares about in Casino Royale, he is consumed with rage and is cold to the world. His dumping of Mathis' body into the garbage is pretty literal. Even one of his friends is disposed like trash. I'm really puzzled as to how you thought this scene was silly. Did you think it was unintentionally funny?

Also, while I don't find the films to be great by any means, I at least think they try to give Bond some sort of arc. Through the first two films, he finds love, some sort of human connection and is then brutally betrayed, thinking it may not have even been real on her end. Through the second film, he turns into a violent brute, cold and calculating; getting revenge like it's a simple mission. Towards the end, through his relationship with the new Bond girl, and in the last scene, he is able to find some sort of solace (haha).

And now compare that to Roger Moore's arcs: Get a new mission, spout out a witty one liner, go through some action scenes w/o a scratch, kill the bad guy, f**k the new bond girl. The End.

[Why Are You Crouching Spock?]

Any Bond movie that has Bond sucking a girls poor little finger to make her feel emotionally better is a failure.

[Cuyan]

I found Inglorious Basterds boring, and most of the performances (Waltz not-included) didn't seems to be all that great. Personally, I feel Tarantino's hype usually gets him more praise than he deserves.

[hammerhedd11]

Spock, what scene are you referring to?

[Thebumwhowalks]

Spock, what scene are you referring to?

The only scene i can think he is referring to is when he is comforting Vesper after she is in shock at having seen him getting into a bit of fight with the ice-cream vendor from Ghost Dog: Way of the Samurai.

[Lord]

I found Inglorious Basterds boring, and most of the performances (Waltz not-included) didn't seems to be all that great. Personally, I feel Tarantino's hype usually gets him more praise than he deserves.
Nope, it was great and deserved to win best Picture instead of the heart locker or what it was called, saying this it was also the first Tarantino film i watched so i wasn't influenced by hype :cwink:

[Cuyan]

I am always amused that some people think "nope" is an appropriate response to an opinion.

[HighFivingMF]

I am always amused that some people think "nope" is an appropriate response to an opinion.

Yep.

[The Morningstar]

To say Fassbender's and especially Melanie Laurant's performances weren't all that is just flat out wrong. Whether you like Basterds or not, I don't understand how this can be denied.

[Cuyan]

From my perspective, they weren't "all that".

[Why Are You Crouching Spock?]

I am always amused that some people think "nope" is an appropriate response to an opinion.

gvdf5n-zI14

[Number 6]

Whether Avatar is derivative or not (it is) it's still crap. The characters in it are so one dimensional and cliche it's hilarious. Especially the main bad guy General.

And the films message is basically "if you're not a tree hugger you're an *******". I find that insulting.

It's far from crap. And, though I will agree on some characters, it is very untrue to say that of all of them. The fact that several of these characters change to the degree that they do shows some depth beyond the surface.

Also, that was really neither the message of the film and, if it were, you are far too easily insulted anyway.

http://i1193.photobucket.com/albums/aa353/Travesty70077/3-DealWithIt.gif

I'm not sure what this is suppose to convey, but I got a laugh.

[The Morningstar]

From my perspective, they weren't "all that".

Well you ain't got a scooby doo then have ya? How was Melanie Laurant's performance anything but amazing? That's not a rhetorical question.

[Number 6]

:up:
Avatar is awesome. Much, much better than Ferngully or Dances with Wolves.
3 posts in a row, sorry:o:woot:

Indeed, good sir, indeed. *holds up drink*

[Cuyan]

Why on earth would I feel any need to justify my personal opinion?

[HighFivingMF]

Why on earth would I feel any need to justify my personal opinion?

Because it's a discussion forum... Not a say how you feel and freak out when someone asks you to elaborate beyond just "because that's how I feel" forum.

Morningstar's just asking what you didn't like.

[Crockett]

Nope, it was great and deserved to win best Picture instead of the heart locker or what it was called, saying this it was also the first Tarantino film i watched so i wasn't influenced by hype :cwink:

Inglourious Basterds is good and I was rooting for it but I didn't mind that The Hurt Locker won since I think that's a good movie as well, one of the few times I was cool with the movie that won Best Picture.

[Cuyan]

Because it's a discussion forum... Not a say how you feel and freak out when someone asks you to elaborate beyond just "because that's how I feel" forum.

Morningstar's just asking what you didn't like.
I just didn't think the performances deserved all the praise, they weren't memorable to me. Beyond Waltz's character I found everyone else to be pretty forgettable.

That being said, "defending" a personal perception of an artist's work is ridiculous. Furthermore, why would I think twice about an anonymous person thinking one way or another about it? Discussion does not automatically imply that things need to be defended or that one side or another is more correct, especially in the case of opinions.

In response to this being a discussion forum, the title of this thread is "State your unpopular film related opinion" not "Discuss/Defend your unpopular film related opinion" had it been titled as such, I would have posted in a more applicable way.

Back to the point of the thread:
I found much of Thor to be rather dull. Overall, I enjoyed it though.

[Thebumwhowalks]

I just didn't think the performances deserved all the praise, they weren't memorable to me. Beyond Waltz's character I found everyone else to be pretty forgettable.

That being said, "defending" a personal perception of an artist's work is ridiculous. Furthermore, why would I think twice about an anonymous person thinking one way or another about it? Discussion does not automatically imply that things need to be defended or that one side or another is more correct, especially in the case of opinions.

In response to this being a discussion forum, the title of this thread is "State your unpopular film related opinion" not "Discuss/Defend your unpopular film related opinion" had it been titled as such, I would have posted in a more applicable way.



Eh, that is the title of the thread, but the whole place is a forum designed with the express purpose of debating and discussing opinions.
It's not called 'State your unpopular opinion and then run away' thread either, haha.

It would be a pretty crap and uninteresting thread if folk did not talk about *why* they feel this way in the face of what seems to be an opposing majority opinion.

edit: I do think that IB is a bit overrated, and have said so before in this and other threads, but I don't agree that those two other actors gave performances that were of a lesser calibre than Waltz necesarily, it was just that Waltz had the best scenes and character to chew on in the film.
I do think the scene in the bar is the second most memorable scene in the film(after the opening scene), and partly that is down to Fassbender(and the other guy playing the nazi). The scene between Waltz and Melanie in the restaurant is probably the third most memorable to me, esp her reaction at the end of the scene, which for me was a memorable moment of great acting.

[Parker Wayne]

Try On Her Majesty's Secret Service. Just check it out. I'm curious of your thoughts on it.

On Her Majesty's Secret Service is one of my favorites. I'm glad that it continuously gets more and more people appreciate it as times moves on. Tracy Bond is my favorite Bond girl because she understands James more than any other character, and while she doesn't try to be on James level in terms of being a fighter or anything like that, she wasn't afraid to follow James into his mission.

Lazenby I thought was okay in the role, and could've gotten better if he wasn't stupid enough to turn down appearing anymore movies. Plus OHMSS has the best Blofeld of all the movies. I wasn't big on Pleasance (perhaps its the Dr. Evil influence) and I hated the guy in Diamonds are Forever. He seems to be a guy people would follow.

I made a list in the Bond thread have that at #5. I find quite a few parallels between OHMSS and Casino Royale. I put OHMSS over it because of Spock said, about the older movies just being a lot more fun.


#5 On Her Majesty's Secret Service
#4 The Spy Who Loved Me
#3 Goldfinger
#2 Goldeneye
#1 From Russian With Love

#6 - Casino Royale
#7 - Dr. No
#8 -Thunderball
#9 - The Living Daylights
#10 - You Only Live Twice

[Sloth7d]

Green Lantern First Flight>>>>> Green Lantern 2011
The Fall of Sinestro to evil in First Flight was The Fall of Anakin to the dark side done right.

[CelticPredator]

Any Bond movie that has Bond sucking a girls poor little finger to make her feel emotionally better is a failure.

And any Bond movie that has Bond put on fake nipples to sneak into a secret compound is a failure.


It's far from crap. And, though I will agree on some characters, it is very untrue to say that of all of them. The fact that several of these characters change to the degree that they do shows some depth beyond the surface.

Also, that was really neither the message of the film and, if it were, you are far too easily insulted anyway.



I'm not sure what this is suppose to convey, but I got a laugh.

It's crap in the sense that it's not original. You could easily guess what was going to happen at every turn. The film offered nothing new from a story stand point.

It was pretty visually, but it's message was bland, and been done before...

Oh and the fanboys suck too. Easily the WORST fanboys in the history of fanboys. They suck in every way fanboys can. Worthless idiots. :o

Why on earth would I feel any need to justify my personal opinion?

Because you're wrong...:o :awesome:


#5 On Her Majesty's Secret Service
#4 The Spy Who Loved Me
#3 Goldfinger
#2 Goldeneye
#1 From Russian With Love

#6 - Casino Royale
#7 - Dr. No
#8 -Thunderball
#9 - The Living Daylights
#10 - You Only Live Twice


Nice list.

Mine-

1- Casino Royale
2- Goldfinger
3- License To Kill
4-The Living Daylights
5- From Russia with Love
6- GoldenEye
7-OHMSS
8- Live and Let Die
9- Tomorrow Never Dies/World is Not Enough (I kinda dig these flicks. They have flaws, but I find them incredibly entertaining)
10- For Your Eyes Only
11- You Only Live Twice.


And IMO the worst of the worst..

1-Diamonds are Forever
2- Die Another Day
3- Moonraker (I'll watch it though...)
4- Man with the Golden Nipple
5- Diamonds are Forever

[The Morningstar]

Celtic Pred enlightens us yet again :up:

[CelticPredator]

Wooo! :awesome:

[Secret Fawful]

I liked Casino Royale when I first saw it but as time goes on I like it less and less. I just don't really find Daniel Craig entertaining or interesting. He bored the turd out of me in Cowboys and Aliens.

[Why Are You Crouching Spock?]

And any Bond movie that has Bond put on fake nipples to sneak into a secret compound is a failure.


No bro, that's totally James Bond.
Much like Sean Connery amazing Asain disguise.

[CelticPredator]

Well, no...it's not. Bond is the books first. So the book Bond is where the basis should be.

[Why Are You Crouching Spock?]

Well, no...it's not. Bond is the books first.

This isn't a book bro, it's a mainstream movie.
Most mainstream movies are very diffrent from the book they are adapted from.

[Cuyan]

Weren't you arguing which was more in keeping with the spirit of the character?

[Why Are You Crouching Spock?]

No, I was the one saying "I don't care".

[The Morningstar]

There is a place for the goofier Bond movies and the more gritty, accurate to the novels movies. I like em both. Well, Casino Royale anyway. QoS gave me a head ache and the main villain was laughable.Vincent Cassell should have played him.

Although the scene at the opera was amazing.

[gwynplaine]

I don't think Cassel replacing Amalric would have changed much. On the other hand, a better screenplay would have helped.
I can't wait for # 23.

[gwynplaine]

Never read a Bond book. Here's my top 10.

1 _ From Russia With Love
2 _ Goldfinger
3 _ Casino Royale
4 _ The Spy Who Loved Me
5 _ Live and Let Die
6 _ You Only Live Twice
7 _ Thunderball
8 _ On Her Majesty's Secret Service
9 _ Dr. No
10_ Goldeneye

[hammerhedd11]

No, I was the one saying "I don't care".

Well, if you don't care, why do you keep saying what Bond is really about like two posts above?

[Jordacar]

This has officially turned into "State your unpopular Bond-related opinion"

[Number 6]

It's crap in the sense that it's not original. You could easily guess what was going to happen at every turn. The film offered nothing new from a story stand point.

It was pretty visually, but it's message was bland, and been done before...

Oh and the fanboys suck too. Easily the WORST fanboys in the history of fanboys. They suck in every way fanboys can. Worthless idiots. :o

You can say this for pretty much a multitude of movies, and really only becomes a criticism whenever talking about a movie you don't like. What are some films you like? Not a single one that brings nothing new from a story standpoint or had a message that's been said before? Yeah, I find that highly doubtful. Do you happen to enjoy A Fistful of Dollars, by chance?

And, really, I've not even seen that many Avatar fanboys. Maybe when the movie was first coming out, but the internet fandom has faded. Seems to me the idiots who are out there saying stuff like 'Dances in Wolves in Space!' far outnumber those who excessively praise it. It sounds to me that it's just become a cool thing to hate on due to its box office pull.

[Secret Fawful]

I don't get all the wankery for Marion Cotillard. I have my own celeb crushes, so I can understand that, I just don't find her all that appealing. Then again I don't find most French women all that appealing.

[Number 6]

I think she's an amazing actress. She's kind of attractive, too. Not like smoking or anything, but I think she has more of a classical beauty to her. I didn't realize there was much wanking going on about her

[JAK®]

Really? I found there to be at least a point for that Mathis scene; after Bond loses everything he cares about in Casino Royale, he is consumed with rage and is cold to the world. His dumping of Mathis' body into the garbage is pretty literal. Even one of his friends is disposed like trash. I'm really puzzled as to how you thought this scene was silly. Did you think it was unintentionally funny?

No, I'm saying that today's "grim and gritty" is the equivalent of the 70's "campy", and that Mathis' death was equally overly gritty as the slide whistle was overly campy.

Quantum Of Solace just tried too hard, it made me dislike the character of Bond a little bit.

[Why Are You Crouching Spock?]

"CutThraot Island" is way better than any "Pirates of the Pirates" of The Caribbean movie.


Well, if you don't care, why do you keep saying what Bond is really about like two posts above?

Because it's being used in a context?
Your entire argument seems to rest on it "not being like the book" as equaling "poorer quality" or "less substance wanted from movies" (which was insulting by the way). That's rubbish. When I talk about "thats totally Bond" I am not talking into account the book at all, i'm purely talking about it in terms of campy fun, not boring Bond. Much like how you would refer to Adam West running around with a bomb or punching a shark. I have practically 0 interest in the book and therefor, couldn't care less. The new Bond movies would be passages from the Bible written by god himself and the movies would still be about as fun as watching paint dry.

[CelticPredator]

You can say this for pretty much a multitude of movies, and really only becomes a criticism whenever talking about a movie you don't like. What are some films you like? Not a single one that brings nothing new from a story standpoint or had a message that's been said before? Yeah, I find that highly doubtful. Do you happen to enjoy A Fistful of Dollars, by chance?

And, really, I've not even seen that many Avatar fanboys. Maybe when the movie was first coming out, but the internet fandom has faded. Seems to me the idiots who are out there saying stuff like 'Dances in Wolves in Space!' far outnumber those who excessively praise it. It sounds to me that it's just become a cool thing to hate on due to its box office pull.


The fans really made me loath it. I was fine with the movie being entertaining...but they took it so ****ing far. It never deserved that Oscar Nom.

But like I said, the film never took it in any new directions. Which disappointed me. No twists, no turns, nothing.

But the directors cut is a better film. Just for the opening alone.

[hammerhedd11]

"CutThraot Island" is way better than any "Pirates of the Pirates" of The Caribbean movie.




Because it's being used in a context?
Your entire argument seems to rest on it "not being like the book" as equaling "poorer quality" or "less substance wanted from movies" (which was insulting by the way). That's rubbish. When I talk about "thats totally Bond" I am not talking into account the book at all, i'm purely talking about it in terms of campy fun, not boring Bond. Much like how you would refer to Adam West running around with a bomb or punching a shark. I have practically 0 interest in the book and therefor, couldn't care less. The new Bond movies would be passages from the Bible written by god himself and the movies would still be about as fun as watching paint dry.

Ok, but saying "that's totally Bond" but not taking into account the books, which is y'know, the ORIGINAL Bond, is beyond idiotic. That's like if they made a Batman movie where he dressed like a squirrel and you saying "that's totally Batman," but not taking into account the actual comics he's based on.
If you like the cheesy old bond movies, I could care less. But don't say that the newer Bond's aren't like Bond when in fact, he's closer to the original than the older rendition.

[Parker Wayne]

I don't care if the Bond movies are like the books, personally. I have no personal connection to the books, so I don't care. I like the ridiculousness of Bond movies, but not when it's too over the top (Diamonds are Forever, Moonraker). It's the same with serious Bond movies too (License to Kill). It's always good to have a great balance of it, like what you get with movies like Goldeneye and The Spy Who Loved Me.

[hammerhedd11]

I don't care if the Bond movies are like the books, personally. I have no personal connection to the books, so I don't care. I like the ridiculousness of Bond movies, but not when it's too over the top (Diamonds are Forever, Moonraker). It's the same with serious Bond movies too (License to Kill). It's always good to have a great balance of it, like what you get with movies like Goldeneye and The Spy Who Loved Me.

And see, I don't care if that's the case. My whole point is that it's idiotic to define a character without knowing anything about the actual source material itself.

[Cuyan]

Can you not have differing interpretations?

[hammerhedd11]

Of course, but to say the one closest to the source material is not Bond is moronic.

[Cuyan]

To place more value in one as opposed to another might also be considered moronic.

[hammerhedd11]

Ok...but that's not the main point that I was making.

[Jordacar]

Found this on io9, figured it was relevant to the current discussion:
Lessons that Other Movie Series Can Learn from James Bond (http://io9.com/5848518/lessons-that-other-movie-series-can-learn-from-james-bond)

[Why Are You Crouching Spock?]

Ok, but saying "that's totally Bond" but not taking into account the books

Is a figure of speech and clearly being indicated in a context. And no, I don't need to take into account the book, at all.

But don't say that the newer Bond's aren't like Bond when in fact, he's closer to the original than the older rendition.

I never said that at any point. And again, I don't care. It's moot.


If you like the cheesy old bond movies, I could care lessn

But you do, you're getting angry and insulting about it.
In fact near enough your first reply was pretty much an insult.

Well, at least you admit you don't want anything of substance in your film.

[hammerhedd11]

Is a figure of speech and clearly being indicated in a context. And no, I don't need to take into account the book, at all.



I never said that at any point. And again, I don't care. It's moot.



But you do, you're getting angry and insulting about it.
In fact near enough your first reply was pretty much an insult.

In what context? You keep saying "in context". I don't think you know what that phrase means. I think if you want to have any sort of intelligent and informed discussion, then yes, the book does need to be taken into account.

And I'm sorry you are so hurt, but according to your post, it does not sound like you do enjoy movies with substance. You seem to enjoy simple breezy movies where people shoot lasers beams at each other and say "one liners full of lolz."

[Parker Wayne]

Of course, but to say the one closest to the source material is not Bond is moronic.

I agree. Bond, probably more than any character, I've always seen as a special case in terms of source material and movies and adapting it.

I've always seen the Bond movies and books as almost 2 separate entities. Few Bond movies are actually really faithful to the book and at times the Bonds are two different characters. That causes a stir between fans of the movies and fans of the books that gets fans of both in the middle. I don't think it's as much What is the truest interpretation of Bond?
than What is the best interpretation of Bond? I acknowledge Fleming's Bond as the truest, even though I only read 2 Bond novels. But I enjoy Bond's depiction in the movies a bit more because I feel like he has a bit more personality in the movies. I prefer the movies over the books, but at the same time I wouldn't disrespect Fleming's original interpretation of the character.

So what is the best interpretation of Bond? It's not really something that can simply be answered

Spock likes a more humor-filled Bond, that's fine with him, even though I think MWTGG is the worst Bond movie ever without competition. You should acknowledge that everyone is not going to like serious Bond.

[Number 6]

The fans really made me loath it. I was fine with the movie being entertaining...but they took it so ****ing far. It never deserved that Oscar Nom.

But like I said, the film never took it in any new directions. Which disappointed me. No twists, no turns, nothing.

But the directors cut is a better film. Just for the opening alone.

Well, I don't know. I honestly never saw much super Avatar-fandom around that point. I remember that when it first opened they were everywhere, but by the times the Oscars came about, it seemed they had died off, at least around the internet.

But yes, the director's cut is better. I agree with that.

[Parker Wayne]

Found this on io9, figured it was relevant to the current discussion:
Lessons that Other Movie Series Can Learn from James Bond (http://io9.com/5848518/lessons-that-other-movie-series-can-learn-from-james-bond)

Bookmarked. It really is a great read.

Lessons that Other Movie Series Can Learn from James Bond
The 23rd James Bond movie is about to start production, with Sam Mendes (American Beauty) directing. Imagine if there had been 23 Batman movies. Or 23 Star Trek movies. Few other movie series can boast that kind of staying power, not just in terms of number of movies but in terms of enduring cultural relevance.

So we've been wondering: What are the secrets of James Bond's immortality? And what are lessons that other movie series could learn from James Bond?
Top image: Detail from the concept art for the "Diamonds are Forever" poster by Robert McGinnis.

The James Bond movies are like their own genre — they conform to most of the spy-movie tropes, but they have enough tropes and enough character of their own to stand as a separate genre. I've always been a bit obsessed with the Bond movies, which are larger-than-life adventures that star a non-superpowered guy. The mixture of violence and slightly tacky elegance, like the ever-present martini and tuxedo-clad gambling, is somehow timeless and thrilling. Throw in a dash of sexploitation, awesome vehicles, and crazy villainy, and you've got a pretty great weekend DVD marathon.

Plus James Bond is one of those characters, like the Lone Ranger or the Doctor from Doctor Who, who has a few defining characteristics, but otherwise can be just a generic hero. You don't really worry about James Bond's motivations in a James Bond story — his motivation is to complete his mission and stop the bad guys. The main character has been recast enough times now that no particular actor is James Bond — each generation has its own Bond. God help us, there are people out there for whom Timothy Dalton is the definitive 007. (At left: Concept art for the "Live and Let Die" poster by Robert McGinnis and Bob Peak, via Illustrated 007.)

Still, it's pretty amazing that these movies keep chugging along, and attracting talent like Mendes, when so many other series have petered out, or else keep stopping and starting like a stalled-out Aston Martin.

So here are some lessons on longevity, from the James Bond movies:

Villains are disposable. Ernst Stavro Blofeld might be the most archetypal James Bond villain, with his white cat and his evil organization SPECTRE - but he hasn't actually appeared in a Bond film since 1981. The Soviet spy organization SMERSH didn't regroup and reinvent itself after the fall of the Cold War - it just vanished. It's like if the Batman films ditched the Joker, or Star Trek dropped the Klingons and Romulans. Instead, we've gotten hit or miss villains, like Jonathan Pryce's media mogul and Christopher Walken's Silicon Valley psycho.

Source material is occasionally helpful, but not essential. I read all of Ian Fleming's novels as a kid, and they're an equal mixture of brilliant suspense and dated weirdness - they definitely don't seem as relevant now as they did in the 1960s. The Bond films probably made the right decision when they stopped trying to follow Fleming's plots, even if they replaced those plots with some completely ludicrous weirdness. But the films still dip back into the Fleming canon every now and then, just when you least expect it - including a big chunk of Casino Royale.

Both light-hearted and gritty versions can be done well. Batman has proved this on television, with Batman: The Brave and the Bold. The Schumacher Batman films weren't bad because they were less serious, they were bad because they were bad. And campy, in a horrifying way. Some of the silly Bond films are pretty awful (Octopussy!) but then there's Spy Who Loved Me, which manages to be discofied and lovely. Or the ultra-glitzy Diamonds are Forever. If the Bond movies had sunk into camp and never gotten out, that would have been a disaster - but they've never felt the need to be just dark and gritty, either. You just know that after Daniel Craig leaves, his successor will bring back a bit of the Roger Moore goofiness.

Rapid course-corrections can save a franchise. When For Your Eyes Only came out just a couple years after Moonraker, it was sort of jarring - especially if you were a little kid and Moonraker was the first Bond movie you ever saw. Where were the outer-space laser fights and zero-gravity nookie? Instead of space disco, For Your Eyes Only gave us a fairly grim movie in which James Bond actually moralizes about the wrongness of revenge - after he spends the start of the movie taking his own revenge, of course. And the plot is fairly simple and actually linear, involving a piece of spy tech that some people are trying to steal. No orchids in space or eugenics in jumpsuits. Sure, the series went right back into crazytown with Octopussy, but getting a break was at least a good idea.

Create a world where the main character makes sense. The James Bond movies really do take place in their own alternate reality, where everybody is sexy and mysterious and fast cars and casinos are everywhere. This reality is updated all the time, and you get the sense that James Bond is constantly going on missions and fighting random bad guys - unlike in superhero movies, which don't really carry over the sense from the comics that there's a whole superheroic world out there. We had a long discussion in the comments last week about how great the pre-credits action scenes in Bond movies are, for re-establishing Bond as well as just showing that he fights random baddies all the time.

Steal from all over the place. Part of how the Bond films have stayed relevant and up-to-date is by stealing from everywhere. Star Wars, the Bourne movies, Close Encounters of the Third Kind, cop shows, horror movies... if it's popular, the Bond movies will rip it off. When people make satires on the Bond movies, like the Our Man Flint films, it sometimes feels as though the Bond films will just turn right around and borrow elements from their satires - although to be fair, I can't think of specifics right now.

Any personal trauma that James Bond experiences is purely temporary. Whenever James Bond falls in love with a woman, she immediately dies. His love is lethal. The good news is, Bond will have forgotten about her entirely by the next film - or at the very least, the film after that. (He does seem to remember about Vesper from Casino Royale in Quantum of Solace, and he avenges Teresa in For Your Eyes Only.) Also, Goldeneye gives Bond a former best friend who betrays him, and it's all very emotional - but then thank goodness, Alec Trevelyan, Agent 006 is never mentioned again. As it should be. James Bond is not someone who has a lot of history that carries over from film to film, he's just James Bond.

[Parker Wayne]

The fans really made me loath it. I was fine with the movie being entertaining...but they took it so ****ing far. It never deserved that Oscar Nom.

But like I said, the film never took it in any new directions. Which disappointed me. No twists, no turns, nothing.

But the directors cut is a better film. Just for the opening alone.

I agree that it didn't deserve an Oscar Nom, but I've always been a man of "if it's entertaining, I don't care about how predictable the story is". I was entertained by Avatar, especially the last 30 minutes of it. I couldn't care less how it wasn't an original story.

[C. Lee]

It's crap in the sense that it's not original. You could easily guess what was going to happen at every turn. The film offered nothing new from a story stand point.

It was pretty visually, but it's message was bland, and been done before...

Oh and the fanboys suck too. Easily the WORST fanboys in the history of fanboys. They suck in every way fanboys can. Worthless idiots. :o
I highly suggest you refrain from calling the fans of ANYTHING such names....and considering all the trouble you got into in the past over your hatred of anything AVATAR I don't find it too bright that you're still complaining about it. Move on.

[Why Are You Crouching Spock?]

In what context?

In the context of goofy campy Bond movies, which is what I value bond movies on, Which has been said, implied and repeated over and over again discounting the book entirely. If you value the book over these movies, good, thats your prerogative, I am under no obligation to do so.

And I'm sorry you are so hurt"

You didn't. I indicated you were attempting to insult and indeed are continuing to use a similar tone because you were upset in some manner. It's generally the case with all posts of this tone. Alot of people purely use internet forums for this reason, i dono, some weird kind of therapy I guess.

We are moving on now, I have a feeling you would rather quite happily grind this page after page.

[hammerhedd11]

In the context of goofy campy Bond movies, which is what I value bond movies on, Which has been said, implied and repeated over and over again discounting the book entirely. If you value the book over these movies, good, thats your prerogative, I am under no obligation to do so.



You didn't. I indicated you were attempting to insult and indeed are continuing to use a similar tone because you were upset in some manner. It's generally the case with all posts of this tone. Alot of people purely use internet forums for this reason, i dono, some weird kind of therapy I guess.

We are moving on now, I have a feeling you would rather quite happily grind this page after page.

If you feel that posting my points clearly and calmly is my way of therapy, then I guess it is. And since you continue to completely miss my point then yes, I guess we can end this. Oh wait, according to you, I'm supposed to be a sad angry troll. Fight to the death! :cmad:

[Thebumwhowalks]

Far be it for me to stick my uniquely sculptured non-adamantium nose into this Bond discussion with a suggestion, but I think these seasonal Bond discussions tell us that someone needs to start an all purpose Bond movies thread over in misc that resembles the Star Wars thread.

All the talk in the current Bond thread will be more focused on the new flick now that they are releasing information, and I guess filming must be starting shortly-ish?

of course that will never happen now that *I*'ve suggested it, haha.

[Cuyan]

Thank You

[Thebumwhowalks]

Aye, I do like reading these discussions/arguments between the campers and the gritters, so it might actually be a good idea to set one up where these kinds of discussions can go on every day without swamping this thread all the time.

[CelticPredator]

I highly suggest you refrain from calling the fans of ANYTHING such names....and considering all the trouble you got into in the past over your hatred of anything AVATAR I don't find it too bright that you're still complaining about it. Move on.
Fine.

As for Bond, it's alright if you like one source more then the other, but the Books ARE what Bond IS. What it became is a different story. You can't say that Roger Moore IS how Bond should be, because it's not. Nor can you say that Sean Connery was how Bond should be.

Ian Flemings Bond is how he should be. But not exactly he has to be.


Or

[Why Are You Crouching Spock?]

Fbut the Books ARE what Bond IS. What it became is a different story.


Actually for the vast majority of people it's the movies that define what Bond is, not countering in the books at all. Nor should they have too. I'm not sure how "what is became is diffrent story". Just because it originated from the books and a specific creator doesn't make that the end of all ends imo.

A good example is startek. Gene Rodderry who created star trek. The first movie made, he had full creative control over. It's generally considered one of the weakest with the sequel (much lower budget and much less creative control) being one of the best. Deep Space 9 as well, apprently he was totally against it wanting a utopian representation of exploration and enlightenment. Deep Space 9 is way, way better than anything he put out outright going against what he thought startrek should "be about".

[gwynplaine]

Enough about Bond already:woot::cwink:
I don't know if it's unpopular, but I'm really not a big fan (major understatement) of Sarah Jessica Parker, Julia Roberts or Katherine Heigl.
Also not a huge fan of Adam Sandler, but the Jack and Jill trailer looks funny so I will probably check the film in theater. My 1st Sandler film in the theater, I also like that Pacino is in it.
The 21st street trailer is pretty bad. On the other hand, I will go see The Sitter because I like Jonah Hill nonetheless. He was great in Cyrus, an underrated film and I think he is a good actor.
I also like Michael Cera and don't really understand why he seems to generate so much hate.

[The Navigator]

Transformers (1986) and Transformers (2007) are pretty much exactly the same quality, with 2007 probably coming out somewhat ahead. And this is coming from someone who was ready to leave the theater halfway through the 2007 version, and wound up liking the cartoon series a lot better.

[scatterax]

For me, the movies are ok, but the 80's cartoon is too cheesy for me so I end up liking the movie better. Same with G.I. Joe. I mean, the movies are like cheesy in a fun way but the 80's cartoons can be almost cringe worthy at times. The closest Transformers has come to living up to it's potential is the beast wars cartoon for me. Still waiting for an epic film version that's faithful to the g1 characters and plot, but with updated stories, visuals. Hopefully like 80 persent cgi with just like real world environments.

but some how i doubt thats practical enough to film/happen ever. :(

[DawnWarrior]

I like Octopussy. I don't love it, but it has some of my favorite Bond scenes.

And I think Vin Diesel's XXX is a kick-ass movie.

[Parker Wayne]

For me, the movies are ok, but the 80's cartoon is too cheesy for me so I end up liking the movie better. Same with G.I. Joe. I mean, the movies are like cheesy in a fun way but the 80's cartoons can be almost cringe worthy at times. The closest Transformers has come to living up to it's potential is the beast wars cartoon for me. Still waiting for an epic film version that's faithful to the g1 characters and plot, but with updated stories, visuals. Hopefully like 80 persent cgi with just like real world environments.

but some how i doubt thats practical enough to film/happen ever. :(

80s cartoons aren't that good, especially compared to 90s cartoons.

[Number 6]

Enough about Bond already:woot::cwink:
I don't know if it's unpopular, but I'm really not a big fan (major understatement) of Sarah Jessica Parker, Julia Roberts or Katherine Heigl.
Also not a huge fan of Adam Sandler, but the Jack and Jill trailer looks funny so I will probably check the film in theater. My 1st Sandler film in the theater, I also like that Pacino is in it.
The 21st street trailer is pretty bad. On the other hand, I will go see The Sitter because I like Jonah Hill nonetheless. He was great in Cyrus, an underrated film and I think he is a good actor.
I also like Michael Cera and don't really understand why he seems to generate so much hate.

Sandler is a lot like Carrey for me. I like him okay in certain comedic roles, but I feel like he's suited more to more serious roles. They've both just found these highly profitable niches, but I wish they'd branch off and do more stuff like Punch-Drunk Love, Eternal Sunshine, and the like.

[gwynplaine]

Sandler is a lot like Carrey for me. I like him okay in certain comedic roles, but I feel like he's suited more to more serious roles. They've both just found these highly profitable niches, but I wish they'd branch off and do more stuff like Punch-Drunk Love, Eternal Sunshine, and the like.
Yeah, I like when comedians explore their dark sides. More recently I was really impressed by Albert Brooks' performance in "Drive." Get this man the Oscar for best supporting actor, he deserves it.
I also would love to see Carrey return to darker roles, he kinda did with Philip Morris which I liked. I'd love for him to play Pennywise, if they ever remade "It."

[DyeLorean]

There's an actor which I can't stand. Honestly, I can't see any of his movies, don't ask me why.
Christian Slater.
Arggh.

[The Morningstar]

You're missing out on some awesome movies then. Like True Romance and Heathers.

[DyeLorean]

I know I know, I'm not like that, generally speaking. I have a very open mind when it comes to movies, series and music. Is just that there's something about the guy that I don't like, it stains everything he's in. Can't explain, is the only actor/actress.

[hammerhedd11]

Sandler is a lot like Carrey for me. I like him okay in certain comedic roles, but I feel like he's suited more to more serious roles. They've both just found these highly profitable niches, but I wish they'd branch off and do more stuff like Punch-Drunk Love, Eternal Sunshine, and the like.

I feel Sandler in particular is very underrated. He's in a lot of stupid s**t, but he's not a bad actor. Reign Over Me and Punch Drunk Love show he's got a lot of chops. Pity he doesn't show them off much.

[CelticPredator]

He's too busy making money.


Jack and Jill will probably be the worst movie ever made.

[DyeLorean]

I feel Sandler in particular is very underrated. He's in a lot of stupid s**t, but he's not a bad actor. Reign Over Me and Punch Drunk Love show he's got a lot of chops. Pity he doesn't show them off much.

Totally agree. I also think he was very good in 50 First Dates. It was his usual funny self, but he also showed some more serious tone in that one.

[Blitzkrieg Bop]

I love Funny People.

[CelticPredator]

I love that movie too. One of my favorites. It's the perfect blend of Comedy and Drama. Great movie.

[DarkSovereignty]

I think my favorite Sandler comedy was The Wedding Singer. It was funny, took place in the awesome 80's, and Sandler actually acted, I mean wow was he fantastic in that movie.

[Blitzkrieg Bop]

Also one of Buscemi's best roles.

[Max J Power]

I love Funny People.
Yeah, it's really good. Sandler branched out a lot with that role.

[Why Are You Crouching Spock?]

Flight Of The Phoenix is one of the better remakes.
Probably better than the original.

[Secret Fawful]

Flight Of The Phoenix is one of the better remakes.
Probably better than the original.

Ribisi ROCKS THAT MOVIE.

[bullets]

The Rum Diary should be getting more attention. I won't be able to see it until tomorrow but it seems overshadowed by everything else , I haven't even seen a thread for it in the misc film section. Now I'm contemplating waiting for rental.

Also, I think these are good Sandler movies ,
Punch Drunk Love , Funny People , Click , Reign Over Me , Spanglish , 50 First dates , Big Daddy , Wedding Singer , Happy Gilmore , and Billy Madison.
I don't care for the rest.

[CelticPredator]

The Rum Diary is good, but the ending is poop.

It also has very little to do with the book. Sans 3 scenes. Even the main part of the novel is skimpped over.

But it's still worth watching.

[Blitzkrieg Bop]

Aside from the Toy Story trilogy and Finding Nemo, I've never liked Disney.

[gwynplaine]

The only Sandler movie I moderately enjoyed was the 1st half of You Don't Mess with the Zohan. I wouldn't mind seeing that character come back in a prequel showing more of his exploits for the Mossad.
I also liked Sandler's work on SNL and I'm kinda looking forward to Jack and Jill, because I thought the trailer had some funny bits in it. But in general, I don't really get his appeal, but to each their own.

[gwynplaine]

Edit.

[C. Lee]

I haven't seen very many of Sandler's movie (because frankly he annoys the hell out of me)...but of the few I've seen I did like HAPPY GILMORE (maybe it was because Bob Barker kicked his butt)....

[El Payaso]

The Rum Diary should be getting more attention. I won't be able to see it until tomorrow but it seems overshadowed by everything else , I haven't even seen a thread for it in the misc film section. Now I'm contemplating waiting for rental.

Also, I think these are good Sandler movies ,
Punch Drunk Love , Funny People , Click , Reign Over Me , Spanglish , 50 First dates , Big Daddy , Wedding Singer , Happy Gilmore , and Billy Madison.
I don't care for the rest.

Sandler was great in Punch-Drunk Love. But I wouldn't dare to ill-treat me through the average Sandler comedy.

[Parker Wayne]

I feel Sandler in particular is very underrated. He's in a lot of stupid s**t, but he's not a bad actor. Reign Over Me and Punch Drunk Love show he's got a lot of chops. Pity he doesn't show them off much.

The thing about Sandler is that he prefers doing dumb movies. It's not even about the money, he just enjoys doing stupid comedy movies with his friends and having a good time. It's different than doing his dramatic roles because it's a more serious work environment and it feels like work to him

Aside from the Toy Story trilogy and Finding Nemo, I've never liked Disney.

Only those two things?

http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lqg1b8A22H1qjwpjn.gif

The only Sandler movie I moderately enjoyed was the 1st half of You Don't Mess with the Zohan. I wouldn't mind seeing that character come back in a prequel showing more of his exploits for the Mossad.
I also liked Sandler's work on SNL and I'm kinda looking forward to Jack and Jill, because I thought the trailer had some funny bits in it. But in general, I don't really get his appeal, but to each their own.

I feel like his early stupid movies like Happy Gilmore and Billy Madison had this huge "so bad it's good vibe" to it. It's so stupid and ridiculous I couldn't help but love it because its meant to be stupid, ridiculous, and insane. I love the world they set up in those movies.

The problem with Adam Sandler's stupid movies today is that they feel more artificial. Also, he's aged and the co-leads, instead of being modestly attactive women, are full supermodels.

[scatterax]

The thing about Sandler is that he prefers doing dumb movies. It's not even about the money, he just enjoys doing stupid comedy movies with his friends and having a good time. It's different than doing his dramatic roles because it's a more serious work environment and it feels like work to him



Only those two things?

http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lqg1b8A22H1qjwpjn.gif



I feel like his early stupid movies like Happy Gilmore and Billy Madison had this huge "so bad it's good vibe" to it. It's so stupid and ridiculous I couldn't help but love it because its meant to be stupid, ridiculous, and insane. I love the world they set up in those movies.

The problem with Adam Sandler's stupid movies today is that they feel more artificial. Also, he's aged and the co-leads, instead of being modestly attactive women, are full supermodels.

Um, you do realize that the co-lead in jack and jill ...is still adam sandler, right?

[Parker Wayne]

Oh, damn, really? He looks good as a woman. :o

Maybe Co-lead was a bad choice of words. I meant love interest.

[scatterax]

i was just messin with u.:awesome:

[Thebumwhowalks]

The only Sandler movie I moderately enjoyed was the 1st half of You Don't Mess with the Zohan. I wouldn't mind seeing that character come back in a prequel showing more of his exploits for the Mossad.
I also liked Sandler's work on SNL and I'm kinda looking forward to Jack and Jill, because I thought the trailer had some funny bits in it. But in general, I don't really get his appeal, but to each their own.

I tried watching that movie, and couldn't get into it, I also asked friends of mine to switch off Billy Madison and Happy Gilmore when they put them on years ago. I also found i couldn't watch that movie he did with Nicolson called 'anger management'.

But, I caught that movie '50 first dates' a few weeks ago on tv, and it was a really great romcom, perfect mix of comedy and emotional pull, had me laughing throughout and jerking the tears too. He was very good in it, and i would say it was more the emotional straight drama that he was most effective at in that one.
I haven't seen it in years, but he was very good in 'Punch Drunk love' as well, great movie.

[DyeLorean]

And let's not forget that awesome Ben Stiller's character in Happy Gilmore.

http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lrt18h3CHH1r2i593o1_500.gif

[gwynplaine]

I rarely leave the theater halfway through a movie. During Anger Management is one of the few times I did. I am also amused at how "out of his league" Sandler's love interests usually are in his movies. He always portrays himself as this ultimate womanizer lol. Also it was funny (not in a good way) to see him attempt to step into Burt Reynolds' shoes and think he could pull off a badass football star/convict in the terrible remake of The Longest Yard.

[Brain Damage]

There's something about Mr. Deeds that makes me really like it.
I don't know what it is.
It has all the typical qualities of a really stupid, bad rom com, yet it has such a charm to it that I can't help but love it.
I think Sandler's characters, both in his traits and performance, as well as the hometown feel of the movie are really what do it for me.
Also, my freshman bio teacher went to elementary school with him =)

[bullets]

The problem with Adam Sandler's stupid movies today is that they feel more artificial. Also, he's aged and the co-leads, instead of being modestly attactive women, are full supermodels.


He was goofier in some of those early films and since he's gotten away from that mostly , it's not as funny. I think him having a hot wife in every film and stuff like him being more successful than his friends in Grown Ups might be some sort of in-joke. In interviews he likes to make fun of his nose , so I don't think he's conceited. Also he supposedly asked Aniston to be in Just Go With It because they've been friends for years.

The only Sandler movie I moderately enjoyed was the 1st half of You Don't Mess with the Zohan. I wouldn't mind seeing that character come back in a prequel showing more of his exploits for the Mossad.
I also liked Sandler's work on SNL and I'm kinda looking forward to Jack and Jill, because I thought the trailer had some funny bits in it. But in general, I don't really get his appeal, but to each their own.

I thought the first half was hilarious but that kind of derailed. I'm worried about Jack and Jill , that's either gonna be funny or a complete disaster.

[DarkSovereignty]

my money's on complete disaster.

[Travesty]

And let's not forget that awesome Ben Stiller's character in Happy Gilmore.

http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lrt18h3CHH1r2i593o1_500.gif
Ben Stiller was great in Happy Gilmore. He was running a quilt sweatshop.

Old Lady: My fingers hurt.

Ben Stiller: What's that?

Old Lady: My fingers hurt?

Ben Stiller: Well guess what, now you're backs gonna hurt, cause you just pulled landscaping duty.

:funny: It's just sooo funny.

[Secret Fawful]

Stiller is great playing a jerk. My favorite character of his is still the one he played in Heavyweights.

[gwynplaine]

I thought the first half was hilarious but that kind of derailed. I'm worried about Jack and Jill , that's either gonna be funny or a complete disaster.
I agree.

[gwynplaine]

I enjoyed Step Brothers. I thought it was better than Talladega Nights.
Even better than Anchorman actually. I know, unpopular:woot:

[CelticPredator]

Indeed it is! Step Brothers is good. But I enjoyed Ricky Bobby and Anchorman more. :D

[gwynplaine]

Most people did.
But I'm glad to see I'm not the only one who liked Step Brothers:up:

[HighFivingMF]

I liked all 3. But Talladega Nights is my favorite.

[gwynplaine]

I also liked all three. But I'm a big John C. Reilly fan and was happy to see him get a bigger role in Step Brothers than in Talladega.

[DyeLorean]

Ben Stiller was great in Happy Gilmore. He was running a quilt sweatshop.

Old Lady: My fingers hurt.

Ben Stiller: What's that?

Old Lady: My fingers hurt?

Ben Stiller: Well guess what, now you're backs gonna hurt, cause you just pulled landscaping duty.

:funny: It's just sooo funny.

:woot::woot:
Yes, yes, I think his character from Dodgeball might be a continuation of this one, even the moustache looks the same.
His bits in Happy Gilmore are very very funny.

[Parker Wayne]

I enjoyed Step Brothers. I thought it was better than Talladega Nights.
Even better than Anchorman actually. I know, unpopular:woot:

NEVER!

NEVER!:oldrazz:

[gwynplaine]

Haha:woot:

[Blitzkrieg Bop]

Step Brothers is the only funny Will Ferrell comedy.

[gwynplaine]

Step Brothers is the only funny Will Ferrell comedy.
I don't know if it's the only one, but to me it is the funniest.
Sorry, Parker Wayne:cwink:

[Blitzkrieg Bop]

The Boondock Saints is nothing but an overrated Tarantino-wannabe.

[gwynplaine]

Never saw it and I don't intend to. It does indeed feel like sub par Tarantino.

[HighFivingMF]

Yeah. I was never remotely interested in seeing it. I was kind of interested after Norman Reedus won me over in The Walking Dead but just... Eh.

[Max J Power]

Never saw it and I don't intend to. It does indeed feel like sub par Tarantino.
If you're in the mood to watch a mildly entertaining crime movie in which the characters say a lot of things that are supposed to sound cool and smart but really have little substance, give it a whirl.

[scatterax]

my two favorite will ferrell movies are elf and megamind, in that order.

[DyeLorean]

Oh Elf, I laughed so much with that movie!

[hammerhedd11]

Stiller is great playing a jerk. My favorite character of his is still the one he played in Heavyweights.

Oh man! Probably my favorite film ever. :woot:

[scatterax]

Oh Elf, I laughed so much with that movie!

It's a classic. I put it right behind It's a Wonderful Life as the best Christmas film ever. no joke.












While typing "joke" I accidentally typed "joker" at first

[CelticPredator]

No Joker?

[scatterax]

No Joker?

Just thought it was funny that I typed joker instead out of habit. tells you how much I'm on these boards.

[CelticPredator]

WHY SO OBESSED??!11/



:D

hehe

[SuperFerret]

It's a Wonderful Life is a terrible movie. :o

[CelticPredator]

^ Hell yeah it is. I bearly watched it once. Never found a need to do it again.

[The Morningstar]

Will Farrell's funniest role was... MUGATU!

[Thebumwhowalks]

If you're in the mood to watch a mildly entertaining crime movie in which the characters say a lot of things that are supposed to sound cool and smart but really have little substance, give it a whirl.

Aye I have that doc 'Overnight', but never really wanted to see the resulting movie, great doc though.
That's the thing though, someone saying things that have little substance is as bad to me as someone who ego w**** over every little thing they encounter, and that's all they do. So what ends up happening is that no matter what they end up talking about, they end up sounding like they are having the same conversation every time you hear/read them. They can't help but want to impress everyone with their 'amazing' minds every time they open their mouths. Every observation/conversation they have is so carefully considered and measured to create a certain image that they just never sound natural. Almost as if they are scared to reveal themselves as a normal regular human being like the rest of us.

The best thing to do is just loosen up, don't be afraid to talk normal everyday crap, but also have serious conversations about life and art, don't be so concerned with what other people think about you.
It's like those pop stars who go to 'image consultants', and measure every little thing they say in interviews, they just end up sounding repetitive and unnatural.

[CelticPredator]

That's why I love Michael Bay movies. They'll never have that kind of talk! :awesome:

"**** just got real!"

Dont need any mo then that! :hehe:

But yeah, that's kinda how I felt while watchin Boondock Saints. High School kids love the **** out of that movie.

[CelticPredator]

Will Farrell's funniest role was... MUGATU!
:awesome:

Am I taking crazy pills here!??

[Thebumwhowalks]

That's why I love Michael Bay movies. They'll never have that kind of talk! :awesome:

"**** just got real!"

Dont need any mo then that! :hehe:

But yeah, that's kinda how I felt while watchin Boondock Saints. High School kids love the **** out of that movie.

Honestly, I can't think of a MB movie I have enjoyed, the first transformers film is the only one that i kind of enjoyed.
I rewatched ROTF, on a bigger tv to check out the action more carefully, but it was not that good at all, unless you just want to watch robots fighting one another for over two hours.
Armageddon...hated it....The Rock...underwhelming...Bad Boys....i tried to get into this but couldn't...

I'm sorry I don't mean to slag off the movies you like, maybe in some strange way it feels like i am slagging off myself?! haha, but that is my honest opinion.

I do think he has a great action/adventure movie in him though, he just needs a great script and to reign in the dumbness, just a mite, haha.

[Secret Fawful]

Here's a seriously unpopular opinion, and one I didn't have long ago. I seriously respect Zemeckis for going the motion capture route and at least TRYING. A hundred failures are wonderful tries if they result in eventual success, and Zemeckis was ahead of his time in some ways and definitely pioneered the effect. Everyone complains about the dead eye effect, and it's only affected me in a couple movies, but outside of the AWFUL facial animation, the art design and look of his motion capture films is actually top-notch. The Polar Express LOOKS like every Christmas painting and card and children's book (yes I know it was a children's book) that I've ever seen, and the blurry, pillow shaded characters actually FIT THE LOOK PERFECTLY. Its the outdated animation where it all falls apart, as well as a bit of a lack of a natural feeling, as the characters also move like robots, but as an experiment in translating an art style to the big screen, if it had been made today it could have been an incredible success.

Although, Tom Hanks is freaking annoying in it. It annoys the hell out of me that Zemeckis needed motion capture to have Tom Hanks play characters that look just like Tom Hanks. Oh, and I despise Zemeckis' Forrest Gump. I DESPISE IT.

[Thebumwhowalks]

Oh, and I despise Zemeckis' Forrest Gump. I DESPISE IT.

haha, it's alright, a bit schmaltzy, but I think the bit where he goes running is pretty damn good, I would liked that to have been the whole movie.

[gwynplaine]

I liked Beowulf. Specially Grendel.

[humbdrumb]

The Back to the Future sequels kind of suck.

[humbdrumb]

Step Brothers is the only funny Will Ferrell comedy.

Do foam lattes make you all farty and bloaty?

[Travesty]

Do foam lattes make you all farty and bloaty?
Well they must, cause after reading his post, I feel like I'm taking crazy pills!

[brett66]

:woot::woot:
Yes, yes, I think his character from Dodgeball might be a continuation of this one, even the moustache looks the same.
His bits in Happy Gilmore are very very funny.

White Goodman = Tony Perkis

[gwynplaine]

It seems like American film makers don't really know how to make great comedies anymore these days. There are exceptions of course. (And granted it's probably the toughest genre to pull off.)
Anyway, hopefully it's cyclical and will come back at some point.

[danoyse]

It's a classic. I put it right behind It's a Wonderful Life as the best Christmas film ever. no joke.

Elf is one of my favorite Christmas movies too. And It's a Wonderful Life is just one of my favorite movies, not just at Christmas.

[CelticPredator]

Honestly, I can't think of a MB movie I have enjoyed, the first transformers film is the only one that i kind of enjoyed.
I rewatched ROTF, on a bigger tv to check out the action more carefully, but it was not that good at all, unless you just want to watch robots fighting one another for over two hours.
Armageddon...hated it....The Rock...underwhelming...Bad Boys....i tried to get into this but couldn't...

I'm sorry I don't mean to slag off the movies you like, maybe in some strange way it feels like i am slagging off myself?! haha, but that is my honest opinion.

I do think he has a great action/adventure movie in him though, he just needs a great script and to reign in the dumbness, just a mite, haha.

The dumbness is fine. I love it. It makes me laugh.


And all I wanted from Transformers was to watch robots fight for 2 hours. What else would I have wanted from a Transformers film? :huh:

[CelticPredator]

Also, I think all the BTF flicks are pretty great. Beowulf has hints of genius...but it's just so bizzare for no reason. It creeped me out....I got this really weird vibe from the whole film. Didn't like it.

The score is great though.

[DyeLorean]

The Back to the Future sequels kind of suck.

Breaks my heart a little bit that you think that way.

[CelticPredator]

Pumpkinhead is an awesome movie. Shame none of the sequels could get the character right.

[scatterax]

Elf is one of my favorite Christmas movies too. And It's a Wonderful Life is just one of my favorite movies, not just at Christmas.

ha, yeah. I was watching the colorized version just a few weeks ago. After seeing that version twice I can definitely say i like the b&w version more.

[Superhero 101]

Have never seen It's a Wonderful Life eventhough everyone has said it's the best X-mas Movie maybe i will Netflix it

[Secret Fawful]

I could never get past the title.

[Figs]

Pumpkinhead is an awesome movie. Shame none of the sequels could get the character right.

:up:

The first film is such a creepy ****ing movie. I watched the hell out of it growing up. One of the things I love about it is that it's basically like those old twisted fairly tales. You know, the ones Disney changed up to make it ok for kids to watch.

[The Navigator]

I could never get past the title.

:batman: :up:

[Darkness Falls]

I could never get past the title.

:bow:

[Parker Wayne]

Step Brothers is the only funny Will Ferrell comedy.
I don't know if it's the only one, but to me it is the funniest.
Sorry, Parker Wayne:cwink:

To quote the great and genius Celtic Predator:

*ahem*

WRONG! WRONG! WRONG! WRONG! WRONG! :o

That is all.


Anchorman dammit! :woot:

The Boondock Saints is nothing but an overrated Tarantino-wannabe.

It's not that good a movie, though I see it as more of a Peckinpagh ripoff than Tarantino.

It's a classic. I put it right behind It's a Wonderful Life as the best Christmas film ever. no joke.


It's obvious what the best Christmas film ever is.

DIE HARD!

[Parker Wayne]

And all I wanted from Transformers was to watch robots fight for 2 hours. What else would I have wanted from a Transformers film? :huh:

Transformers 2 made it look so boring though. I didn't think it was possible but MB made it possible in TF2. I'm glad the fights were better in TF3 but I guess the whole first experience of TF1 in a theater trumps all.

Plus, I liked TF1 because it had a tighter script (though still flawed), good balance of ensemble characters, and the humor wasn't as heavy handed as the sequels.

[CelticPredator]

This conversation happens every time...but I was not looking for anything but visual effects. I didn't give a **** about anything other then that.

Everyone says how boring TF2 is....I can't see it. It's got one helluva badass action scene at the end.

And TF3 is just insane. COD owes so much to Michael Bay. MW3 is like Transformers with Russians. :D

[Number 6]

I've never quite understand the whole 'I know it's couple and utter ****, but it was pretty.' I guess maybe when I was younger, I could be entertained with nothing but that kind of stuff, but I need at least some degree of depth or solid writing to entertain me nowadays. I suppose at least acknowledging that it is complete **** in the process is commendable.

The unpopular opinion to end them all, perhaps: I don't care very much about Batman. Mostly the character, but even his world is stating to lose its appeal for me.

[CelticPredator]

It's simple. And it goes like this. Movies are a visual medium. To make a great movie, you need more then visuals. However....sometimes, just sometimes, you want to just relax, and watch. I dont get people who cannot do that at any time. I find it snobish.

But then again, if you can do it all the time, then you're dumb. :hehe:

I have to be in the right mood for some Bay, or big action crap spectcle.


I dunno...i'm not easy to please, but I if the filmmakers intention is to make it a certain way, and he or she knows it, i'm perfectly alright with it's bad-ness.

Like Punisher War Zone. That movie is hilarious. I think it was intentional. I laughed so hard at all the insane ways people died. :D

[gwynplaine]

I love how this thread keeps going and going:woot:

There has never been a good Punisher movie, besides "Death Wish", not technically one I know. Someone really needs to do the Aaron and Dillon run on Max for the big screen now. That would be the ultimate Punisher movie.
Kingpin hires Bullseye to kill Frank Castle. Bullseye starts obsessing about Castle and to get into his mind, find out what makes him tick so to speak (to better kill him), becomes a sort of Bizarro Punisher. Get Woody Harrelson to play Bullseye. I would pay to see that film.

[CelticPredator]

I would like to see a good Punisher flick. I don't know all that about him, but the character is pretty simple. You'd think someone could get it right.


I also think Ray Stevenson was the best. He had this attitude that was pretty badass. He was the only legit good thing about that movie.

[Superhero 101]

I actually prefered the Thomas Jane Punisher over the Ray Stevenson one

[The Morningstar]

Problem with Punisher is... he's a walking, talking Hollywood cliche. He's unique in the comics, but in movies? That type of character has been done to death a million times.

There needs to be something unique about a Punisher film. The idea of adapting Aaron's Kingpin/Bullseye arc could be interesting. And Woody Harrellson as Bullseye, or Deadpool, would be my dream comic book movie casting.

[danoyse]

I could never get past the title.

But when it's said in the film, it's one of the best moments in the movie. It's about a guy who never gets anything he wanted and think his whole life is failure. How everyone around him would have been better off if he'd never been there.

Then he gets the chance to see exactly what would have happened if he wasn't there, and it turns out all of these little things had made all the difference in the world and he hadn't even realized it.

That's when Clarence points out, "Don't you see, George? You've really had a wonderful life?"

And he had. Who knew? I love that movie.

[HighFivingMF]

But when it's said in the film, it's one of the best moments in the movie. It's about a guy who never gets anything he wanted and think his whole life is failure. How everyone around him would have been better off if he'd never been there.

Then he gets the chance to see exactly what would have happened if he wasn't there, and it turns out all of these little things had made all the difference in the world and he hadn't even realized it.

That's when Clarence points out, "Don't you see, George? You've really had a wonderful life?"

And he had. Who knew? I love that movie.

Fawful was making a joke. That's what Batman said when Robin and Alfred wanted to watch the movie with him.

[Jordacar]

Marlon Brando was kind of an a-hole

[danoyse]

Fawful was making a joke. That's what Batman said when Robin and Alfred wanted to watch the movie with him.

Well then I certainly hope that's what Alfred and Robin explained to Batman after he said that about the movie. :oldrazz:

[Thebumwhowalks]

I also think Ray Stevenson was the best. He had this attitude that was pretty badass. He was the only legit good thing about that movie.

But it was an intentional tongue in cheek, gorey, ott action splatterathon...going by what you were saying about the Bay movies, that intention makes PWZ 'legit' as a type of action film.
and before anyone says, 'Well, it's not legit because there are far better Punisher comics out there than what that screenplay gave us.' ,the thing is, I struggle to think of *any* comic book movie that has given us a screenplay that is as good as the best comics featuring the character. The Nolan Batman films, Spider-man 2, X-Men 1, X-Men 2, X-Men FC, those are the only semi-original screenplays that I can think of that are as good as quality comics featuring those characters, and even then, they're still not as good as the best ones.

[moviedoors]

I liked Beowulf. Specially Grendel.

Yes. I really liked Beowulf. I rewatched it not that long ago, and I think it's just as odd, just as interesting to look at, just as rousing, and just as strangely funny as I did when it came out. I think the screenplay deserves more credit for taking a one dimensional, episodic poem and making an actual narrative with a through line out of it, whilst still accounting for the legend itself. Very smart.

And that Dragon is still the best damn winged beast we've seen on the big screen since Dragonslayer (and on that note, I can't wait until Peter Jackson annihilates them all when we finally get to see his Smaug in action).

[Thebumwhowalks]

And that Dragon is still the best damn winged beast we've seen on the big screen since Dragonslayer (and on that note, I can't wait until Peter Jackson annihilates them all when we finally get to see his Smaug in action).

haha, annihilates who? other dragon movies? They have all been pretty terrible.
The only person Peter Jackson has to worry about upstaging is himself, in terms of the hobbit being compared to his lotr trilogy.
The only times you have to worry about 'following someone onstage' is when a far more accomplished performer has just been onstage before you, and is not only far more accomplished at performing for the public, but is the one who broke the new ground in the first place. The following performer working in his shadow, in the art form he created.

Because, that's the thing isn't it? The folk in the film industry, the folk on his sets, might all prefer him, but the public is another matter entirely, you can't control and manipulate the general audience's opinion, you can try, but ultimately they make up their own minds.
I'm not worried about that at all, but now I know for sure that he is.

[moviedoors]

Ok.

[gwynplaine]

Yes. I really liked Beowulf. I rewatched it not that long ago, and I think it's just as odd, just as interesting to look at, just as rousing, and just as strangely funny as I did when it came out. I think the screenplay deserves more credit for taking a one dimensional, episodic poem and making an actual narrative with a through line out of it, whilst still accounting for the legend itself. Very smart.

And that Dragon is still the best damn winged beast we've seen on the big screen since Dragonslayer (and on that note, I can't wait until Peter Jackson annihilates them all when we finally get to see his Smaug in action).
:up:

[Sentinel X]

I completely agree on Beowulf. It was a great movie and I don't understand why it gets so much hate. Grendel was a force to be reckoned with. What a terrifying monster. His first attack was very horrific and my favorite scene in the film.

Anyways, I think K-Pax , I am Sam, and Blindness were great movies. I don't understand where all the hate is coming from :huh:

[Cuyan]

I loved K-Pax! I thought Blindness was great as well, I wasn't aware there was hate for it.

[Sentinel X]

Critics rated all three very lowly...after I read the reviews and saw these films I was just confused. Not only were they not that bad, they were actually pretty darn good movies in my book. I think blindness really pushed it in terms of content and that probably made a lot of people uncomfortable.

[hammerhedd11]

Marlon Brando was kind of an a-hole

I don't think that's an unpopular opinion so much as it is a fact.

[hammerhedd11]

Yes. I really liked Beowulf. I rewatched it not that long ago, and I think it's just as odd, just as interesting to look at, just as rousing, and just as strangely funny as I did when it came out. I think the screenplay deserves more credit for taking a one dimensional, episodic poem and making an actual narrative with a through line out of it, whilst still accounting for the legend itself. Very smart.

And that Dragon is still the best damn winged beast we've seen on the big screen since Dragonslayer (and on that note, I can't wait until Peter Jackson annihilates them all when we finally get to see his Smaug in action).

I don't think many people know the screenplay was written by Neil Gaiman. I also agree, while the original story is influential, it's not something that would've been really that suited for a film if it was left as is.

[CelticPredator]

But it was an intentional tongue in cheek, gorey, ott action splatterathon...going by what you were saying about the Bay movies, that intention makes PWZ 'legit' as a type of action film.
and before anyone says, 'Well, it's not legit because there are far better Punisher comics out there than what that screenplay gave us.' ,the thing is, I struggle to think of *any* comic book movie that has given us a screenplay that is as good as the best comics featuring the character. The Nolan Batman films, Spider-man 2, X-Men 1, X-Men 2, X-Men FC, those are the only semi-original screenplays that I can think of that are as good as quality comics featuring those characters, and even then, they're still not as good as the best ones.

I dont know what you just said, but I still like Bay, and I still think the only actual good thing in that movie was Ray.

[Thebumwhowalks]

I dunno...i'm not easy to please, but I if the filmmakers intention is to make it a certain way, and he or she knows it, i'm perfectly alright with it's bad-ness.

Like Punisher War Zone. That movie is hilarious. I think it was intentional. I laughed so hard at all the insane ways people died. :D

Ok, sorry, I should have also quoted this part of a different post, i was also reffering back to this statement. But, i think i forgot you typed up that bit about PWZ at the end of this post, I was referring to the first paragraph in that other reply.
It confused me when you said Ray Stevenson was the only 'legit' thing about the film, whereas here you seem to be arguing that if the filmaker's intention is to make a movie that is 'bad', then that is a legitimate form of art.

[CelticPredator]

I guess. Legit bad movies are pretty fun. Piranha is greatness.

[Lasirius]

Critics rated all three very lowly...after I read the reviews and saw these films I was just confused. Not only were they not that bad, they were actually pretty darn good movies in my book. I think blindness really pushed it in terms of content and that probably made a lot of people uncomfortable.

I thought Blindness was very good too. José Saramago, the author of the novel, was moved to tears by it.

[gwynplaine]

Marlon Brando was kind of an a-hole
So were, allegedly, Picasso, Chaplin and a bunch of others.
I still really enjoy their art though.

[Secret Fawful]

There was a story I read once that Chaplin and Groucho were playing golf or maybe it was tennis, and Groucho was making fun of him and Chaplin got so mad he threw his club or whatever on the ground and stormed off the course.

Yeah, got to lose a bit of respect for a comedian who couldn't go toe to toe with Groucho. But I hear they greatly respected each other too.

[El Payaso]

I don't think that's an unpopular opinion so much as it is a fact.

Lol. True.

[Thebumwhowalks]

That's my dad you're talking about....:cmad:

[gwynplaine]

There was a story I read once that Chaplin and Groucho were playing golf or maybe it was tennis, and Groucho was making fun of him and Chaplin got so mad he threw his club or whatever on the ground and stormed off the course.

Yeah, got to lose a bit of respect for a comedian who couldn't go toe to toe with Groucho. But I hear they greatly respected each other too.
I like these kind of anecdotes:up:
I still love both of them though, with a slight preference for the Marx Bros because of the genius that was Harpo. I recommend reading his memoirs "Harpo Speaks", one of the best actors' bio I've read.

That's my dad you're talking about....:cmad:
Yeah, show more respect for Thebumwhowalks' father:woot:

[gwynplaine]

Woody Allen's greatest films are "Sleeper", "Take the Money and Run" and "Love and Death." The "early, funny ones" as I think he calls them.