Oh, it's an incredibly stupid movie. However, the Enterprise expending all of its weapons is kind of awesome in the battle in the Mutara-- Sorry, whatever nebula.DuracellEnergizer said:
Seeing as I've never seen TDKR (and have no plans to ever do so), I wouldn't have known that. Regardless, I had more problems with the way the character was written than the way he was performed.
Star Wars Revisited Wordpress
Star Wars Visual Comparisons WordPress
doubleofive said:
Oh, it's an incredibly stupid movie. However, the Enterprise expending all of its weapons is kind of awesome in the battle in the Mutara-- Sorry, whatever nebula.DuracellEnergizer said:
Seeing as I've never seen TDKR (and have no plans to ever do so), I wouldn't have known that. Regardless, I had more problems with the way the character was written than the way he was performed.
I'm confused.
I was going to draw a parallel between Nemesis and WoK, but figured that might be tricky ground in a post-STID world.TV's Frink said:
I'm confused.
doubleofive said:
DuracellEnergizer said:
Seeing as I've never seen TDKR (and have no plans to ever do so), I wouldn't have known that. Regardless, I had more problems with the way the character was written than the way he was performed.
Oh, it's an incredibly stupid movie. However, the Enterprise expending all of its weapons is kind of awesome in the battle in the Mutara-- Sorry, whatever nebula.
Star Wars Revisited Wordpress
Star Wars Visual Comparisons WordPress
Hey, it's me. said:
DuracellEnergizer said:
Seeing as I've never seen TDKR (and have no plans to ever do so), I wouldn't have known that. Regardless, I had more problems with the way the character was written than the way he was performed.
Have you seen Batman Begins and The Dark Knight?
DuracellEnergizer said:
Hey, it's me. said:
DuracellEnergizer said:
Seeing as I've never seen TDKR (and have no plans to ever do so), I wouldn't have known that. Regardless, I had more problems with the way the character was written than the way he was performed.
Have you seen Batman Begins and The Dark Knight?
Yes I have, and that is why I have no interest in watching TDKR or any future films that might be made in the same vein; I don't care for pretentious "realism" in anything related to Batman.
Interesting point of view. But I don't think you can label the style as 'pretentious realism'. Bruce Wayne is a real guy (not literally but you know what i mean) He's not an alien from Krypton or a student who gains magical abilities through getting bitten my a mutant spider. Burton had done the Gothic style. There was the silly campness in the 60's series. What other style was there? Personally I thought the whole style and feel of the Dark Knight Trilogy was bang on. What where your issues with the way Batmans character was written?
DuracellEnergizer said:
Hey, it's me. said:
DuracellEnergizer said:
Seeing as I've never seen TDKR (and have no plans to ever do so), I wouldn't have known that. Regardless, I had more problems with the way the character was written than the way he was performed.
Have you seen Batman Begins and The Dark Knight?
Yes I have, and that is why I have no interest in watching TDKR or any future films that might be made in the same vein; I don't care for pretentious "realism" in anything related to Batman.
Replace "pretentious 'realism'" with "Christian Bale" and I agree 100%.
I saw them more as "gritty realism". There's no possibility of a Mr. Freeze in Nolan's take, or any other unusual villains from the rogue's gallery.
Where were you in '77?
Hey, it's me. said:
Burton had done the Gothic style. There was the silly campness in the 60's series. What other style was there?
What where your issues with the way Batmans character was written?
DuracellEnergizer said:
Hey, it's me. said:
Burton had done the Gothic style. There was the silly campness in the 60's series. What other style was there?
My ideal Batman film would basically be a live action adaptation of the 90's animated series or a Bronze Age comic - something not too surreal, but still plainly taking place in a comic book world.
Nolan's films do not feel like they take place in a comic book world in any real, significant way, so I don't consider it a real Batman movie; it more like a movie about some commando in a black cape.
What where your issues with the way Batmans character was written?
Batman is a ridiculous joke in a stupid-looking costume with throat cancer, Playboy Bruce is an idiotic douchebag, and real Bruce is just colourless and boring. I'd elaborate further if I could, but suffice it to say I'm just not very good at elaboration.
Admittedly the gravel voice did become quite annoying at times, but he was in disguise I mean come on. Bruce isn't exactly Mr Charisma in the cartoons either but I will accede he was pretty flat in the films. But It didn't really deter me from enjoying the trilogy. Michael Keatons Wayne was my favourite btw. And the who the hell is Romanian???
People of Romania???
Hey, it's me. said:
Admittedly the gravel voice did become quite annoying at times, but he was in disguise I mean come on. Bruce isn't exactly Mr Charisma in the cartoons either but I will accede he was pretty flat in the films. But It didn't really deter me from enjoying the trilogy.
In Bruges (2008)
I really liked it.
4 out of 4 racist dwarfs.
DuracellEnergizer said:
Seeing as I've never seen TDKR (and have no plans to ever do so), I wouldn't have known that. Regardless, I had more problems with the way the character was written than the way he was performed.
For all the absolutely shitty movies you watch and leave negative comments for on here, I am often surprised at your lack of willingness to waste time on mediocre ones.
Mediocre?
CP3S said:
DuracellEnergizer said:
Seeing as I've never seen TDKR (and have no plans to ever do so), I wouldn't have known that. Regardless, I had more problems with the way the character was written than the way he was performed.
For all the absolutely shitty movies you watch and leave negative comments for on here, I am often surprised at your lack of willingness to waste time on mediocre ones.
Hey, it's me. said:
Mediocre?
It's a word that means something not terrible but not great.
Was suppose to see The Man of Steel with a group of friends last night. But once we got to the theater a few of my friends decided they'd really rather see World War Z and those of us who wanted to see The Man of Steel gave in. Such utter shit! Absolutely awful in every way imaginable! This is why I never see movies like this in the theater. I feel like I wasted $5.50, a couple of hours of my life, and a perfectly good evening off. Also frustrating that it will be a whole week before I have another evening free to go check out Superman just because we had to go see that worthless pile of tripe.
Imagine the most generic zombie film your mind can possibly come up with. Then remove all the gore. Add a bunch of large scale mindless action, a bunch of explosions. There, that is World War Z. It is like a shitty summer blockbuster got together with a shitty zombie horror flick and they had a bastard child together. If Michael Bay did zombies, this is exactly what we'd get.
The whole time watching it I was shifting in my seat trying to stay comfortable while wishing it would hurry up and end. Such a long piece of shit too. I intentionally tried to go to sleep just so I could get through it, but failed and had to suffer the whole thing. This movie was so damn shitty, here it is 3 in the morning and I am still pissed off that I wasted anything to do with myself on it. Even the gas spent driving to the theater feels like a regrettable loss.
Worse of all. We get out of the theater and before anyone else says anything, one of my friends pipes up and says, "That was a lot better than I thought it would be! I mean, they changed a lot from the book, but overall they did a pretty good job!"
Better than you thought it would be??? How freaking bad did you think this damn turd was going to be??? Why the hell did you want to go see it if you thought it was going to be worse than that? I went in with really low expectations, and came out having a nervous breakdown and wishing I could have slipped into a coma. The fact that nobody else out of the group made a single comment on the film after our friend said that, makes me feel sure the others in the group felt the same way as me, but now we couldn't rag on about how awful it was without being rude to our friend who already stated that he really liked it.
0 out of 4 piles of Brat Pitt's steaming hot turds
Overhead two ladies talking about WWZ when I was getting my hair cut. I realized I wasn't the target demographic for this movie.
I think two hours of Brad Pitt doing his laundry would make money. ;)
As Michael Bay is doing the Ninja Turtles, your comment fills me with a nameless dread...
Where were you in '77?
....where in God's name do you live that movie tickets are $5.50? In Southern California, my student discount tickets I buy on-campus are $8 -- and that's $5 less than you pay at the multiplex! It's getting so bad and I'm so damn stubborn that I almost never go to the movies even when I really want to see something.
A Goon in a Gaggle of 'em
TV's Frink said:
Hey, it's me. said:
Mediocre?
It's a word that means something not terrible but not great.
Thanks for clearing that up.
bkev said:
....where in God's name do you live that movie tickets are $5.50? In Southern California, my student discount tickets I buy on-campus are $8 -- and that's $5 less than you pay at the multiplex! It's getting so bad and I'm so damn stubborn that I almost never go to the movies even when I really want to see something.
$5.50 is the matinee price around here. You also get a discount if you're a student, military or a senior. The discount used to be like $6 back in the day but I don't know what it is now. Now I pay the regular $9.50 admission. =/
CP3S said:
DuracellEnergizer said:
Seeing as I've never seen TDKR (and have no plans to ever do so), I wouldn't have known that. Regardless, I had more problems with the way the character was written than the way he was performed.
For all the absolutely shitty movies you watch and leave negative comments for on here, I am often surprised at your lack of willingness to waste time on mediocre ones.
Best comment ever!
Its more of a reply than a comment =P
bkev said:
....where in God's name do you live that movie tickets are $5.50?
In Southern California, my student discount tickets I buy on-campus are $8 -- and that's $5 less than you pay at the multiplex! It's getting so bad and I'm so damn stubborn that I almost never go to the movies even when I really want to see something.
Well, if there's a bright center to the universe, I'm in the state that it's the farthest from. I live in a crappy Southern state with piss poor education statistics and the fourth highest obesity rate in the country (in other words, it would be entirely legit to call it a state filled with high quantities of stupid fat people). Trust me, cheap movie tickets are hardly a consolation. $9.50 is actually the normal 2D movie ticket price around here, but one of the lesser quality theaters near me offers matinees for $7.50, and late matinees (4:00 - 5:30) for $5.50.
If I was living in Southern California right now, I'd be more than happy to pay way more for my movie tickets.
The few cinemas I go to dont cater for fat people. You'd have to end up crow-barring them out of their seat, if they'd managed to squeeze themselves in to it to begin with. Does this lowly Southern state take the physical bulk of its citizens into consideration when designing cinema seating?