I’ll go first. Mine is that I can’t stand the Deadpool movies. They are self aware and self referential to an obnoxious degree. It’s like being continually reminded that I am in a movie. I swear the success of that movie has directly lead to every blockbuster having to have a joke every 30 seconds
The Mario movie was incredibly mediocre, despite its high production value. I’m talking MCU-levels of truckloads of money spent with shockingly little to show for it.
I finally watched it after hearing good things and wow, yep. Incredibly mediocre, cashing in on nostalgia.
I did enjoy the music, though, but probably mostly because of nostalgia and my love for NES/SNES Mario games.
Interstellar is a terrible movie that doesn’t say or do anything special and I still don’t understand why anyone thinks it’s so amazing.
I did really like the robot guy though.
Dude I cannot understand the love that movie gets. Even the “scientifically accurate” go-to gets under my skin. I don’t know what it was going for, but it bristles my skin when I see discussion about how great it is.
It’s a movie made for space nerds, and if you aren’t a space nerd I can understand not enjoying it. Part of what made it so amazing is just the black hole simulation, no one had ever rendered one that accurately with such high fidelity.
I’m a huge space nerd. I did also appreciate the visuals and realistic portrayal of time dilation, and should have noted that (though it may have diluted my opinion a bit?). I just didn’t like the actual movie itself.
Lmao, no it isn’t. At best, it’s made for people who are lightly into space/science and also lightly into cinema, so please don’t trot out the “you need a high IQ to enjoy this movie” stuff. If it were made for space nerds, two scientists selected for deep space flight wouldn’t need to stop and explain what E=MC² is to one another.
That’s kind of always been Nolan’s schtick, though, and I guess it’s working out for him because he’s got the a huge, quite passionate fan base. I’ll never understand the hype and find his movies quite mid as cinema, but eh.
There was a physics paper published based on the simulation of the black hole because of how accurate it was. The depth is there if you look for it.
That’s not quite right. They hired a theoretical physicist to provide them equations for simulating a black hole. Then, the SFX studio used their Nolan Movie Money to generate it extremely accurately to the extent that it helped spawn further research. It’s not that the studio happened to get it right from research. They were given all the pieces they needed and were able to do something these physicists had a hard time doing likely because they never had that kind of money/equipment: make an exceptional, high-fidelity, cinematic simulation.
Last year’s DnD movie is the best film of the last ten or so years. It succeeded on every level, except in the box office.
My hypothesis is that Hasbro insisted on branding it “Dungeons & Dragons” to push the brand, and non-gamers figured it wasn’t for them. If they’d have made the main title “Honor among Thieves”, all the game nerds would have seen the DnD logo, and others wouldn’t have been turned off *. As it stands, people will find it and it’ll become the new “Starship Troopers” that bombed but shines forever in retrospect.
* See “Arcane”.
The original Blade Runner movie is not nearly as good as the sequel. The sequel highlights how lesser the original’s plot was. We overly praise the first one because of the Tear in the Rain Speech.
Tenet is a great movie!
Uncontroversal.
Really? A lot of people seem to hate it for some reason…
Yeah because it’s shit
Blade runner 2049 was a boring slideshow of backdrops with the “bwaaa” music overlaying it and occasionally plot happened. What plot is that? I don’t fucking remember.
Painfully upvotes
Ill upvote you, because its an appropriatly unpopular opinion, but ill have you know I’m truly offended.
Gonna try to phrase this an inflammatory way:
People who like bad movies have been conditioned by consumerism to not appreciate art. They believe spectacle, humour, and a tight plot are ‘good enough’, and they don’t value thoughtfulness, novelty, beauty, or abrasiveness nearly enough. Film is more than a way to fill time and have fun. Film is more than an explosion, a laugh, and a happy ending.
On an unrelated note: Mad Max: Fury Road is one of my favourite movies.
It’s strange that you said that and then said you liked fury road. I thought fury road was the epitome of spectacle and production value with actual value.
What would you consider a “bad movie,” because I wouldn’t consider a “tight plot” one of their shared features. Spectacle: absolutely, humor: frequently, tight plot: if only.
The original Star wars trilogy was overrated, the sequels were underrated, and I’d rate them all to be equally mediocre.
Saving Private Ryan is a pro-war movie.
It’s pro war? To me it was the first depiction of the horrors of war. It made me think about my support for armed conflict and ultimately against it.
To me it was the first depiction of the horrors of war.
That doesn’t necessarily make something pro or anti war.
To me, showing me something horrible is to be against it.
All militarists know that war is horror - they relish the horror of it.
That’s why they love movies like Saving Private Ryan (which justifies the horror by ascribing justification to it) while disliking movies such as The Thin Red Line or Catch 22 (which strips any kind of justification away from it).
