Jump to content

Movie Discussion Thread


HundredProofSam
 Share

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, pixeljunkie said:

 

:lol: 

 

Usually i get disgusted when trolls run amok. But this movie is a game changer! Dunkirk is now my de facto litmus test in film analysis among online movie critics.

 

What I have clearly noticed among regular movie-goers these days is they all want their blockbuster movies to be full of joy, life, comfort, vibrant colours and very formulaic story. Even the camera work has to be very steady and not shaky. Any film that goes quite opposite inducing different emotions other than those mentioned is labeled as a bad/boring/empty film automatically by critics themselves let alone laymen and snobs. Viewers do not want to be provoked or challenged. They want films to treat them intelligently when all that is being served to them as so is just through spoon-feeding. 

 

Art is also supposed to make one feel discomfortable, annoyed and disgusted by the actions of the characters and story unless it isn't well-made. But I don't think many people can recognize it even if it is perfectly-made, especially in a popular category. It's like they just want to see the same thing and same movie over and over again with different actors and camera work. If anyone does anything new with the genre, it becomes boring or it is not supposed to be like this, it should've been done this way! Otherwise, you don't get it or you're a hack.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, The Panda said:

 

What I have clearly noticed among regular movie-goers these days is they all want their blockbuster movies to be full of joy, life, comfort, vibrant colours and very formulaic story. Even the camera work has to be very steady and not shaky. Any film that goes quite opposite inducing different emotions other than those mentioned is labeled as a bad/boring/empty film automatically by critics themselves let alone laymen and snobs. Viewers do not want to be provoked or challenged. They want films to treat them intelligently when all that is being served to them as so is just through spoon-feeding. 

 

Art is also supposed to make one feel discomfortable, annoyed and disgusted by the actions of the characters and story unless it isn't well-made. But I don't think many people can recognize it even if it is perfectly-made, especially in a popular category. It's like they just want to see the same thing and same movie over and over again with different actors and camera work. If anyone does anything new with the genre, it becomes boring or it is not supposed to be like this, it should've been done this way! Otherwise, you don't get it or you're a hack.

Btw how come you are back after writing those big pms and calling me a dick when I told you to reconsider. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, AtheK said:

Btw how come you are back after writing those big pms and calling me a dick when I told you to reconsider. 

 

I had to spew some corny sh*t to you to get my account suspened. :P In reality, I just needed to take a break since IVG got so predictable and tedious, now it's time to pull some fun sh*t bro! :D I have been active on Discord till now. Just not here. 

Edited by The Panda
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, The Panda said:

 

I had to spew some corny sh*t to you to get my account suspened. :P In reality, I just needed to take a break since IVG got so predictable and tedious, now it's time to pull some fun sh*t bro! :D I have been active on Discord till now. Just not here. 

And this time I might just ban you for fun.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, harsh1387 said:

Dunkirk was good. Not mind blowing but good. As for being Nolan's best, it's far from it.

Sent from my Redmi Note 3 using Tapatalk
 

 

Wow are you sure? Vets loved it man. One of them cried. Also what about rotten tomato score? Is that a lie?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Latest Update: Justice League is nearly a 3 hour film. Just 20 minutes of it is mostly new additional footage directed by Joss Whedon, who had written those scenes with Zack Snyder in February before the latter's daughter passed away.

 

Since they are adding extra footage now there won't be an Extended Cut for Justice League. :-) 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, The Panda said:

Latest Update: Justice League is nearly a 3 hour film. Just 20 minutes of it is mostly new additional footage directed by Joss Whedon, who had written those scenes with Zack Snyder in February before the latter's daughter passed away.

 

Since they are adding extra footage now there won't be an Extended Cut for Justice League. :-) 

 

Nice 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^ You are being as glib as that Zib dude. Spill the beans if you want to, writing cliff-hanger posts ain't endearing anyone to you. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And this time I might just ban you for fun.
Lol he had been active on discord.. he did tell me he will be back in sometime..

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ALPHA17 said:

^ You are being as glib as that Zib dude. Spill the beans if you want to, writing cliff-hanger posts ain't endearing anyone to you. 

 

Very easy to criticize someone's else opinion when you don't really have one...do you??Offer one then we'll maybe talk.

 

I gave a straight up honest take on the film. I'm not going to waste time talking the subtle nuances or the nitty gritties of this film like some pretentious filmschool hipster or a nolanbro.

 

I stated clearly I had my reservations about it, and I solely researched the reactions the film was getting to offer some backstory ...to which some people took in the wrong sense..NBD... water under the bridge.

 

 

Going back on the film again ..you want glib? ill give you glib...

 

The only thing Nolan does in Dunkirk is being ballsy enough to not offer any context other than words at the start of the film on the plot of this film

And glaringly omitting the French army's gallant effort to keep the Germans away from the beaches by surrendering entire divisions to the Germans at the end.

So that the British could escape (yes I know french some escaped too but they were sent right back)

 

But this film doesn't really show any of that ....now does it?

 

Hows's that for a cliffhanger?..10/10

 

BRAVO NOLAN!

 

 

 

 

21 minutes ago, KyoyaHibari said:

 

Lol :rofl: 

 

 

08d1780356deb9e2c184ac0a174287de3312c4bb

Edited by zibalingz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Daniel Craig ‘will return as James Bond’ for a fifth time :smokey:

Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 crosses $860 million worldwide,making it one of the highest grossing movies of 2017
So far,only Fast 8 and Beauty & The Beast have earned more than that!
________

Ragnarok promo art

IeRubFp8.jpg
 

Edited by Star Lord
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

4 hours ago, zibalingz said:

I gave a straight up honest take on the film. I'm not going to waste time talking the subtle nuances or the nitty gritties of this film like some pretentious filmschool hipster or a nolanbro.

 

You were never honest. You hated the movie even before watching it. And all you do is waste time explaining how bad the movie is with those long a*s posts. Half the reasons you mention are pointless. Like why there is no French side of the story or lack of any any political imlications. That was not the intent of the movie, it's meant to be a survival movie. And I think it didn't do a great job even at that. 

 

I didn't like the movie all that much either, barring the technical marvel. But I said my opinion and moved on. But you seem to have all the time in the world to hate lol. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, zibalingz said:

Very easy to criticize someone's else opinion when you don't really have one...do you??Offer one then we'll maybe talk.

 

I gave a straight up honest take on the film. I'm not going to waste time talking the subtle nuances or the nitty gritties of this film like some pretentious filmschool hipster or a nolanbro.

 

I stated clearly I had my reservations about it, and I solely researched the reactions the film was getting to offer some backstory ...to which some people took in the wrong sense..NBD... water under the bridge.

 

 

Going back on the film again ..you want glib? ill give you glib...

 

The only thing Nolan does in Dunkirk is being ballsy enough to not offer any context other than words at the start of the film on the plot of this film

And glaringly omitting the French army's gallant effort to keep the Germans away from the beaches by surrendering entire divisions to the Germans at the end.

So that the British could escape (yes I know french some escaped too but they were sent right back)

 

But this film doesn't really show any of that ....now does it?

 

Hows's that for a cliffhanger?..10/10

 

BRAVO NOLAN!

7

 

I think you really need to take a deep breath. That posts only reference to you was that PixelJunkie is making about as much sense posting what is the equivalent of pretentious whataboutery. 

 

Next coming to my opinion, I already gave that, quite liked it and that was it. Would I call it Nolan's greatest, debatable, would I call it a good war film. Hell yes. 

 

Compared to your desperate floundering about for reasons to dislike the same which include gems like,

  • A guy on Reddit could not figure out the three parallel stories -- So movie is bad -- Followed by I do not think movie is very complex 
  • The movie is too loud -- I think you need to experience live firing of weapons to know loud 
  • There are no French soldiers in the movie -- Wrong and more importantly I think you miss the point of brevity else-wise Nolan would have to include the Germans, the Belgians, the Polish and more importantly other men from The Raj
  • There is no blood in the movie -- What has blood got to do with War? People die due to shitty reasons like being in a wrong place at the wrong time

No one has to give film school level analysis to justify whether they liked the film or not. No one has to do the opposite either but then you go on ranting about how Nolan is a hack job and shoot yourself in the foot. 

 

I do not have to be shown each and everything about a situation because if you try for that, you get flaccid tripe like A Bridge Too Far and L.o.C. Kargil which try to compress weeks of parallel events in a single viewing and make for a piss poor watch because half the time you do not know what is going on. In that sense, he (Nolan) has succeeded in making people go back and read up about the events surrounding Dunkirk, now whether they do this on Wiki or read John Keegan, Antony Beevor, Liddel Hart, Lothar Buchheim or the thousands of other sources is up to them. 

 

We got your point when you first stomped into the thread, you do not have to carry on if you feel you are being ganged up on. Thanks. 

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...