Schlosser85
Civilian
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2007
- Messages
- 0
- Reaction score
- 30,205
- Points
- 0
Marion>>>>>>>>>>>Willie
For the record, I was more thinking of the problematic depictions of foreign cultures as well of the annoying characters and non-stop action spectacle.Temple of Doom is the Bay-formers of the 1980s.
Marion>>>>>>>>>>>Willie
I'd say also Help and whatever other movies they made are pretty much so as well. And I'm a fan of their music. I prefer Yellow Submarine, maybe because it's animated and the cool colorful and psychedelic visuals go very well with the songs, but it's also easier to swallow the story; A thin but entertaining variant of good vs evil.Hard Days Night is just the Beatles making prats of themselves....
Edward Scissorhands makes its point about as subtly as a train running over a cow.
Avatar is just Dances with Wolves in space, they should have given Kevin Costner a credit !
The reason is similar to the latest Tomb Raider film, I guess. Well-crafted with good performances (in case of QaD, it's loaded with mega-actors), but ultimately derivative and cliche. And Stone's character is overshadowed by nearly everyone in the film.I just watched it again for the first time in a long time, but one film that was a flop on release and disliked by critics that I really like is Sam Raimi's The Quick and the Dead. Most of the time when I like unpopular films, I can usually see the arguments against it and just prioritize the things it does well above its faults, but this was one of those films where I really don't understand why it was so hated. Maybe it would be more popular if it came out today. I don't know. Anyways, I'm a sucker for tournament arcs, of which this is one of the best ones done in a feature film, full of fun, memorable characters (even if in small roles) and nice cinematography. Gene Hackman plays a great slimy villain and there is a lot of nice cinematography when it comes to the duels.
The reason is similar to the latest Tomb Raider film, I guess. Well-crafted with good performances (in case of QaD, it's loaded with mega-actors), but ultimately derivative and cliche. And Stone's character is overshadowed by nearly everyone in the film.
I just watched it again for the first time in a long time, but one film that was a flop on release and disliked by critics that I really like is Sam Raimi's The Quick and the Dead. Most of the time when I like unpopular films, I can usually see the arguments against it and just prioritize the things it does well above its faults, but this was one of those films where I really don't understand why it was so hated. Maybe it would be more popular if it came out today. I don't know. Anyways, I'm a sucker for tournament arcs, of which this is one of the best ones done in a feature film, full of fun, memorable characters (even if in small roles) and nice cinematography. Gene Hackman plays a great slimy villain and there is a lot of nice cinematography when it comes to the duels.
All three of Mad Max movies starring Mel Gibson are boring to me. Beyond Thunderdome might be the easiest to watch of the three cause it sort of reminds me of Hook, but it still bored me.
I played all three of them today for the very first time, and found the shift to the wasteland to be completely rushed and out of nowhere. The rest of the movie did not instill any interest in the characters for me, all I thought of were set pieces used as plot devices without much character put into them.I can understand the first one, but even Road Warrior? Wow.