logo Sign In

moviefreakedmind

User Group
Members
Join date
22-Jul-2014
Last activity
26-Apr-2023
Posts
8,754

Post History

Post
#926547
Topic
The "101 Ways to Improve Off-Topic" Thread
Time

Something I’d like to discuss further is what was mentioned in the AOTC thread regarding the foolishness being dragged into OT. http://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/926446

I thought this was great, and as a relatively new member compared to nearly everybody else on the forum, I am curious what you all think on the subject, especially regarding what Silver Wook stated about perhaps making this site an invite only place.

I figured this was as good of a thread as any seeing as how it directly pertains to improving Off Topic, but sorry for not contributing anything specific to the 101 ways.

Post
#926234
Topic
Your favorite movies
Time

LuckyGungan2001 said:

My favourite film of all time is a tie between Kill Bill Vol 1 and Pulp Fiction. Coincidently, both directed by Tarantino. After that the list gets all jumbly. I used to have an in order list going up to 30, but then my standards changed and I scrapped it.

Movies I give 10/10:

-Star Wars

-The Empire Strikes Back

-Evil Dead 2: Dead by Dawn

-Army of Darkness

-Reservoir Dogs

-Kill Bill Vol 2

-Back to the Future

-Birdman

Movies that I give 9/10 to:

-The Big Lebowski

-Shaun of the Dead

-Scott Pilgrim vs The World

-The Revenant

-Back to the Future Part 2

-Jackie Brown

-Inglourious Basterds

-Django Unchained

I’m sure there’s plenty more.

Movies I haven’t seen that may get 10/10

-Fight Club

-2001: A Space Oddesey

-The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

-The Shawshank Redemption

-12 Angry Men

-Seven Samurai

-Goodfellas

-The Silence of the Lambs

-The Usual Suspects

What a long bump.

All of those movies came out before you were born.

Post
#925550
Topic
Movies generally considered "bad" that you like.
Time

DuracellEnergizer said:

moviefreakedmind said:

I didn’t even mind the part with the water at the end; I thought it seemed believable enough. It’s not like the aliens were there to settle Earth, they were just an unknown threat present only for a brief time.

Let’s turn the tables around. If a group of humans were to visit a world – a world covered 71% with sulfuric acid, where it rains sulfuric acid, and where the native inhabitants have sulfuric acid on tap – and go down to the surface completely buck-naked with absolutely no protection from the elements whatsoever, would that be believable in the slightest?

That depends on what we needed there. We already go to the moon, with only a suit to protect us, what if it tore, or malfunctioned!?

I can find it believable enough that the aliens needed something from Earth that was worth the risk, or, maybe they had had no exposure to water before/didn’t know it would damage them. I can suspend my disbelief when it comes to these things.

Post
#925540
Topic
Movies generally considered "bad" that you like.
Time

Mike O said:

The evangelism of Signs is perhaps a little much, and the plot holes are big, but I like the film stylistically: emphatically slow, operatic but small.

I liked Signs quite a bit. The evangelism didn’t bother me, except for the moment with the prophetic mother, which was just too nonsensical. I didn’t even mind the part with the water at the end; I thought it seemed believable enough. It’s not like the aliens were there to settle Earth, they were just an unknown threat present only for a brief time.

Post
#925500
Topic
What is wrong with... <strong>Attack of the Clones</strong>? - a general discussion thread
Time

A major flaw with Attack of the Clones is the bizarre scene in which the entire frame flips into an inverted position and the audio shifts into a distorted mess of indistinguishable sounds, and a talking Laserdisc appears on the screen, reciting lines from expanded universe books. Strangely enough, this was only on my VHS version of the film, and when I watched it on DVD this entire segment was missing.