Name a few movies you liked that most people hated.

One I like was "Lucy". Most people hated it and yes, I know the 10% of the brain thing is a myth. I get that! But given I know about what's commonly known as "the twin slit experiment" and that the possibility of knowledge can affect reality at the quantum level I liked the idea of a human achieving a new level of awareness and being able to then essentially affect reality by choice was an interesting one. Also the idea that in essence humanity becomes it's own creator was one I liked to. Lucy was in some ways almost a Dr. Manhattan movie as Lucy was basically in many ways like watchmen's Dr. Manhattan.

Id have to say Only God Forgives, its pretty much style over substance in every way. I just happen to like very grim and immersive/atmospheric movies.

Starwars episode 8.
Lucy.
Starwars episode 7
The meg

One thing I liked in Lucy was the subtle religious message. When the two sides where shooting it out in the hospital, they were destroying a religious stature in the crossfire.

later we discover that lucy herself, upon attaining something like omnipotence, travels back in time, meets the hominid Lucy, and possibly does something t6o her to ensure humanity would exist when she touched her. (tho, technically, simnply going back in time and being seen be people in the past would imply that since that happened there had to be a human race advanced enough to create the situation that lead to Lucy's transcendence...)

So in a sense human science creates a situation where a person attains full awareness of reality, which would according to a lot of quantum theory and some proven experiments, mean they would be able to affect reality to a great degree given their greater ability to observe it fully, and becomes the creator of the human race.

Some time after Lucy was released, a new experiment proved that time travel, of a sort, at the quantum level, is not only possible but happens and can be demonstrated in a lab.

So yeah, I liked lucy a lot. I do think she was an expansion on the Dr. Manhattan character to a large degree.

As to quantum time travel in a lab...

https://youtu.be/8ORLN_KwAgs


Another movie i like that a lot of people don't was "Zardoz".

I kind of like Alien vs Predator Requim. I'll never call it a good movie, but I think it got more hate than it really warranted.

EDIT: Oh and because I just saw it on Netflix: Jason X. I don't care what anyone says. It's the funniest Friday the 13th movie by far, and by the sheer virtue of being the only Friday the 13th Film to induce any reaction from me other than to groan at the awfulness on screen it is automatically the best film in the franchise. Always appreciate a movie being made by people who know how utterly stupid the premise is and just run with it.

I know a lot of people hate it but I liked "Star trek the motion picture". Yes I know about stephen collins. That has nothing to do with the movie.

 Techpriestsupport wrote:
I know a lot of people hate it but I liked "Star trek the motion picture". Yes I know about stephen collins. That has nothing to do with the movie.

Star Trek TMP is grossly underrated IMO. It wasn't as action-packed as Star Wars, but who cares? In some ways, it was closer to the spirit of the original series than any other Star Trek movie.

One movie I could mention that I love but a lot of people hate is Battle: Los Angeles. I think it made a refreshing change in the whole "alien invasion" movie theme in that we see what's happening from the point of view of ordinary soldiers instead of seeing the big picture from the point of view of the President or generals. Plus I really enjoyed the combat sequences in there. Just a very cool movie to me.

Star Trek TMP is pretty crappy TBH. It’s still the best of tye bad Trek films but that’s hardly saying much.

For my pick: The Dark Tower (2017) - reviled by critics and fans alike, it seemed perfectly serviceable to me. Of course, I haven’t read the novel in 20+ years and don’t care about the series.

 Manchu wrote:
Star Trek TMP is pretty crappy TBH. It’s still the best of tye bad Trek films but that’s hardly saying much.

For my pick: The Dark Tower (2017) - reviled by critics and fans alike, it seemed perfectly serviceable to me. Of course, I haven’t read the novel in 20+ years and don’t care about the series.

Well the movie takes place AFTER the book series. The end of the last book ends where the first book begns but with some important changes (namely he has the horn, which he has in the movie). Its the bad characterizations and the mad rush through a lot of plot points thats bad. Rolands primary character element is his single minded drive to reach the tower and everything and everyone he will sacrifice to do as such. In the movie he couldn't possibly care less about the tower.

I don’t care about the books. I viewed the movie as its own thing and on those terms it was entirely competent, unlike many movies released in 2017 that were reviewed much better.

Which is fine. But again, a movie called the Dark Tower that has no Dark Tower in it and whos protagonist isn't interested in any Towers.

The Dark Tower as a thing was certainly in the film and attacking it was Walter’s main goal, driving all of the action in the film.

 Manchu wrote:
The Dark Tower as a thing was certainly in the film and attacking it was Walter’s main goal, driving all of the action in the film.

Sure. They showed some distant single shot of it. Walter was interested in attacking it. Roland was interested in avoiding it. The man in black then instigated Roland for no reason that would serve his plans especially because Roland didn't give a gak about anything at the start of that film. If Walter just decided to leave Roland alone the movie would have just ended with Walter winning. Idiot bad guy was an idiot for no reason. Without ROLAND being motivated to find and save the tower the whole movie had to have the bad guy be a moron to get the good guy involved at all.

Walter wanted to use Jake’s power to destroy the Tower. Fatherless Jake bonded with Roland, who hates Walter for killing his own father. Roland and Jake team up to defeat Walter.

As I said, competent film.

 Manchu wrote:
Walter wanted to use Jake’s power to destroy the Tower. Fatherless Jake bonded with Roland, who hates Walter for killing his own father. Roland and Jake team up to defeat Walter.

As I said, competent film.

Walter didn't NEED Jake to do it. He could have kept using any psychics to do it. Jake just would have gotten it done faster while also re-attracting the ire of the one man in possession of magic guns and super human training to use them. Again, an idiot who made his own problems.

BTW I am glad you liked it. I thought it was fine for what it was. Just didn't think it was particularly any good.

 ZergSmasher wrote:

 Techpriestsupport wrote:
I know a lot of people hate it but I liked "Star trek the motion picture". Yes I know about stephen collins. That has nothing to do with the movie.

Star Trek TMP is grossly underrated IMO. It wasn't as action-packed as Star Wars, but who cares? In some ways, it was closer to the spirit of the original series than any other Star Trek movie.

I really appreciated ST:TMP a lot more when I re-watched it recently, it has a very different pace to a lot of modern movies and you can tell that the audience back then was expected to have a lot more sense of Romance for space travel. The shuttle trip that reveals the Enterprise felt really drawn out in a nice sort of way.


The film I really liked this year which didn't do so well at the box office was Annihilation. There wasn't much about it that I didn't like.

I liked sttmp for its vast sense of scale, the hugeness of the unknown cloud, the sheer size of it. It invoked the old "sense of awe and wonder" really good SF should have.

The BenJen Daredevil, whilst not great its far from the worst hero movie being far less stinky than Thor 2, Iron Man 2 or Apocalypse (although J-Law's inability to hide her total disinterest was worth a star)

Hobo with a Shotgun, folks bemoan its schlocky unpleasantness and ikky violence but as an ode to all things 80's cinema its a masterpiece

 Lance845 wrote:
Walter didn't NEED Jake to do it. He could have kept using any psychics to do it. Jake just would have gotten it done faster while also re-attracting the ire of the one man in possession of magic guns and super human training to use them. Again, an idiot who made his own problems.

BTW I am glad you liked it. I thought it was fine for what it was. Just didn't think it was particularly any good.

As you say, Walter wanted Jake because Jake could get the job done. Walter was super eager to destroy the Tower and his unbroken streak of victories against everyone standing in his way made him arrogant, hence his torment of Roland. In this sense, most bad guys in movies are their own downfall.

I don’t think it’s a great film by any stretch. But it was panned way, way more harshly than was either necessary or even reasonable.

 Manchu wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
Walter didn't NEED Jake to do it. He could have kept using any psychics to do it. Jake just would have gotten it done faster while also re-attracting the ire of the one man in possession of magic guns and super human training to use them. Again, an idiot who made his own problems.

BTW I am glad you liked it. I thought it was fine for what it was. Just didn't think it was particularly any good.

As you say, Walter wanted Jake because Jake could get the job done. Walter was super eager to destroy the Tower and his unbroken streak of victories against everyone standing in his way made him arrogant, hence his torment of Roland. In this sense, most bad guys in movies are their own downfall.

I don’t think it’s a great film by any stretch. But it was panned way, way more harshly than was either necessary or even reasonable.

I suppose.

Something many don't realize is every single one of King's novels are part of a shared universe with the Dark Tower series being the central story/conflict that every other book is either a part of or a consequence of (The creature from IT has escaped from outside the bounds of reality into that world because of the damage being done to the Tower by Walter weakening the Beams). Walter goes across many worlds sewing chaos in the name of the Crimson King. Randall Flagg, the main villain of the Stand, is Walter as an example. With all the shared universes going on and with IT coming out right around the same time, the release of The Dark Tower would have laid a great foundation for that central conflict and linking threads.

I think the outrage was for a few reasons. 1) People who liked or even read the stories were pissed about how little was done with it. 2) the mischaracterization. 3) They tried to cram a lot of that mythology into the short movie while going basically nowhere with it and doing a poor job of explaining it. 4) The resulting weirdness of all that is probably a no go for most movie goers. You clearly enjoyed it despite it's flaws. But I think most people saw the 3 or 4 leaps for the movies logic for the story and it just disconnected them from the whole experience.

I thought the Dark Tower movie was pretty bad, though the little kid tag along was oddly not the worst part of the film I suspected it would be from the trailers.

Really I think at issue is that telling the story of the Dark Tower in any meaningful way doesn't work with a movie format. There's not enough time in a film, and the Dark Tower books are on the longish end for published novels (though not full door stoppers).

The series really needs to be a TV series to get anywhere.

I didn’t enjoy it “despite its flaws” — I enjoyed it because it had strong fundamentals. Contrast The Dark Tower to its contemporary, Rogue One. The former has a clear narrative arc with a few well-drawn characters. Result? 16% RT, 34% Metacritic. The latter consists of rambling nonsense played out by a large cast of cardboard nobodies. 84% RT, 65% Metacritic. Now, R1 was a much glossier, even awe-inspiring production (let’s hope so, with nearly $200M more spent than The Dark Tower). But it was a pathetic waste of time, just in terms of the basic components of storytelling. Snubbing The Dark Tower and praising the likes of R1 is just a very clear testament to how critics and audiences alike have abandoned story and character and plot for razzle dazzle.

I liked Suicide Squad.

Question is, is it a bad film that you nevertheless like (that’s the other thread) or do you think it’s an okay or even good film that got unfairly panned?

I love iron man 3. Man its a great film. I don't get the hate for it.

 Manchu wrote:
Question is, is it a bad film that you nevertheless like (that’s the other thread) or do you think it’s an okay or even good film that got unfairly panned?

I like it, and it's an objectively terrible film, I think. Every criticism is true. I don't know why I like it.

I’m sure Margot Robbie helps a bit.

Hudson Hawk.

It was a Bruce Willis movie released shortly after Die Hard. And it suffered from the worst - or at least most inappropriate - ad campaign possible. It was advertised as being an action-adventure movie in the same sort of mold as Die Hard... but that's not what the movie was at all. More than anything else, it was a live-action cartoon, with all the wacky hijinks that entails.

Needless to say, the clash between expectation and reality made sure it failed dismally.

If you take it for the highly comedic film that it is, not the serious action-adventure film it was advertised as, you see it's actually quite a good film. It just wasn't what people were expecting, that's all.

I put Hudson Hawk up with Last Action Hero as great films that apparently just don't work for most people. I never got why either of them were panned so hard. Anyone who enjoys Big Trouble in Little China should be able to "get" them.

Gremlins 2. My friend and I saw this film several times in the theater and rented (and copied) it the day it became available on VHS. My parents were so confused why we liked the film.

Gremlins 2 is almost universally considered better than 1. Its a parody of gremlins 1 which is itself a parody. Its great.

Another vote for Hudson Hawk.
And I liked Daredevil with Affleck. It wasn't the best thing ever but it was a completely fine super hero film.

 Lance845 wrote:
Gremlins 2 is almost universally considered better than 1. Its a parody of gremlins 1 which is itself a parody. Its great.

Maybe now, but it wasn't always so. Like Clue and Starship Troopers, it seemed to be dismissed by an entire generation.

I can't say I like "catwoman' with Halle berry, but it was not as bad as critics make it out to be. The premise of a cosmetic that makes you look younger but literally turns your skin to *&%#ing stone in the process was oddly believable. I mean, people inject their faces with botulinum toxin to look younger. People dissolves layers of their face with acid to look younger.

So a new cosmetic comes along that makes you look younger but turns your skin to stone. I imagine peolle asking "How much younger? "

Catwoman is (mostly) unintentionally hilarious and quite bad, but I think some of the backlash was that somehow Ms Berry was a proper actor and somehow shouldn't be doing silly films that is a whole rabbit hole of wrong thinking, and her willingness to pick up her Razzie in person shows she knew too, but bills need playing, or a new house, car, whatever

I honestly really enjoyed Ghost in the Shell.
I knew going into it Hollywood wouldn't care at all about the source material.
But I still fully enjoyed it.

Screw everybody. I liked "Superman returns".

 Techpriestsupport wrote:
Screw everybody. I liked "Superman returns".

I'm sort of fond of it too but think it suffered from a little too much reverence to the Reeves films from Singer but really thought Brandon should have got another go prior to the recent debacle(s),

I'm usually not impressed by all the american high budget blockbusters, some of them are fun but they never really "hit" me, even the most successful ones like the MCU episodes. And yet I liked Pacific Rim: Uprising a lot, lol.

I also enjoyed Pacific Rim Uprising a lot. It captured the feeling I'd get watching old Godzilla movies.

Well, let's face it. Some of those old Godzilla movies belong in the other thread, not this one. They really WERE that bad, even though we love them anyway.

(Memo to self: Mention some of the old Godzilla movies in the other thread.)

Some were, sure, but not so many as people insist. I get tired of people who think there is only one way to judge the quality of a movie, or that all movies are made with the same aims creatively. Look at all the people in the other thread who called Infinity War mediocre; just because a film was not made for their particular tastes they assume it is of poor value.

Well, sure, but you're on that slippery slope...because the inverse is exactly the same. You say X is of a particular value....so it's so? That knife cuts both ways.

True. But this is the thread for movies people dump on, not movies we consider outright bad and enjoy anyway, so .... Yeah.

John Carter (2012) got a lot of unecessarily harsh criticism IMO. It’s not great, and it falls short of the epic tentpole Disney must have hoped for, but it has an pretty excellent sense of balancing fun with action.

Last Action Hero
Matrix Reloaded
Matrix Revolutions
Pirates of the Caribbean 2
Pirates of the Caribbean 3
Pirates of the Caribbean 5
Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines

I’ll agree with John Carter and the Matrix sequels, I really liked them. Also AvP and the Prometheus movies.

Prometheus is a frustrating watch but it us certainly better than is often said.

The funniest movie I ever saw was Brain Donors.

I really liked Ang Lee’s Hulk.

In school I give out timed quizzes and I time them by song lengths just like Hudson Hawk!!

AvP-R. For some reason people like the first AvP and crap all over AvP R and I cannot figure out why on any level.

Don't the Predators in AvP2 kill an unarmed pregnant woman?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Don't the Predators in AvP2 kill an unarmed pregnant woman?

The Predator in AvP 2 isn't on earth for a hunt collecting trophies. Any "Rules" about the hunt don't apply. He's a cleaner who is wiping out Aliens that got out of control and picking up after the mess made by the idiot Predators from AvP 1. He's there to kill everything and everyone who gets in his way or compromises his mission.

Also no, doesn't kill any pregnant people. The Premature Queen Pred-Alien does use the pregnancy ward to breed a lot of drones quickly.

I say this as someone who doesn’t hate AVP:R ...

AVP feels like someone seriously wanted to make a great movie where aliens and predators fight.

AVP:R feels like someone made a movie to make fun of the people who seriously wanted a great movie where aliens and predators fight.

Lol. Thats awesome. I can agree that AvP R feels like they were making fun of the people who failed to make a great movie where aliens and predators fight.

My only sore spot for AvPR is that it takes place in a universe where AvP happened and is actually a direct consequence of it.

Pacific Rim Uprising.

If you like Kaiju movies it's one of the beat ever made. I think movie goers expected too much from a giant robot and monster film made for 10 year old kids.
The non stop action and amazing effects are worth a lot more to me in this genre than a story without plot holes.

 Ghool wrote:
Pacific Rim Uprising.

If you like Kaiju movies it's one of the beat ever made. I think movie goers expected too much from a giant robot and monster film made for 10 year old kids.
The non stop action and amazing effects are worth a lot more to me in this genre than a story without plot holes.

I sadly missed this one and Rampage and need to correct that. I do often find myself wondering how the Kaiju formula needs to change. Everyone wants to see the big battle but there's still another hour or so of movie to fill up and that seems to where most of them let people down.

Skull Island filled that time with wacky characters and 'Nam. Uprising fills that time with wacky characters and...

Tank Girl, loopy animated sequences, trippy characters, comic-bookey to the core.

 Turnip Jedi wrote:


Hobo with a Shotgun, folks bemoan its schlocky unpleasantness and ikky violence but as an ode to all things 80's cinema its a masterpiece

Oh thats a solid one.

 LordofHats wrote:
I kind of like Alien vs Predator Requim. I'll never call it a good movie, but I think it got more hate than it really warranted.

I literally walked out of that movie in the theatre it was so bad.

I got in to see it for free, but wanted a refund on my time

Have a real weak spot for the Crow movies. It such a great premise and there's always a few good one-liners. I was also a fan of the TV show, which is really hard to find now in days.

I hated Lucy, but it is fun to show to new people just for the facial expression they get when the scene where the actress calls up her mother and says 'I remember what your breast milk tasted like'. That's a hell of a drunk call and the mere idea has broken a couple people so far.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
Skull Island filled that time with wacky characters and 'Nam. Uprising fills that time with wacky characters and...

Kong was clearly not a kids movie. Or at least it was clearly not targeted at 10 year olds.
Uprising was. Hence why there is such a huge critical difference in how they were received. One was edgy and dark, with 'Nam (which no kid is going to have any real good idea about) , vs. a bunch of kids fighting big monsters in giant robots. One was clearly for kids and the other wasn't.

Like some others on here I also really enjoyed John Carter, Lucy and the Scar-Jo Ghost in the Shell.

The Golden Compass was a blast, and I remain disappointed that movie didn't strike a chord with audiences and get the sequels that were clearly set up in the film. The setting and characters in that movie really engaged my imagination and I would have loved to see more.

I also get flak from some of my friends for enjoying most Will Ferrell movies, especially Anchorman and Talladega Nights. Haters can hate, I love those movies and they make me laugh even after the 100th viewing.

Coming from the other thread, I love Krull and can't understand how anyone can hang gak on that movie.

Loads of them that really enjoyed but "critics" hated

Rampage
Predators
John Carter of Mars
Underworld (all of them)

Of course I hated some of those that the critics worshiped and claimed were gods gift to creation. F them.

Scream
Inception
Last Jedi

AVP - R

Also no, doesn't kill any pregnant people. The Premature Queen Pred-Alien does use the pregnancy ward to breed a lot of drones quickly.

There was some really dark stuff in that movie - I really enjoyed it,

So, am I the only guy on these boards who thought that, fethed up and flawed as it is, and man, that's one seriously fethed up, flawed movie, The Predator was great fun ?
It's the only movie in 2018 that I walked out of with a big smile.

 HudsonD wrote:
So, am I the only guy on these boards who thought that, fethed up and flawed as it is, and man, that's one seriously fethed up, flawed movie, The Predator was great fun ?
It's the only movie in 2018 that I walked out of with a big smile.

We three of us went to watch it and mostly enjoyed it - the end scene was BAD, but the rest was disjointed but fun so no you are not alone.

Its certainly better than crap like Last Jedi in pretty much all respects.

 Mr Morden wrote:


We three of us went to watch it and mostly enjoyed it - the end scene was BAD, but the rest was disjointed but fun so no you are not alone.

Its certainly better than crap like Last Jedi in pretty much all respects.

The late reshoots and rewriting are painfully obvious, what little plot there remains is all over the place, but at the same time, it's the attitude that sells the movie to me.
Lots of series and movies going for that good ol' 80s vibe these days, but "The Predator" is the only movie I've seen in a long while that might as well have been released in the 80s, and people would have loved it back then. It's dirty, mean, crass and unapologetic !
The only thing I don't understand, is why they called if "The Predator". It should have been the "The A Team". Another studio interference, I guess...

I also enjoyed John Carter. I did not know anything about what I was going to see when I went into the cinema (I had not at that stage come across the character before) and I was very entertained.

I liked the Ultramarines movie. Still do!

Tron : Legacy... Awe inspiring visuals and music. Solid Directing and performances.

I liked John Carter enough to buy it and read some of the books, but I wouldn't say I loved it. It feels like a movie that should have been better than it was, like it's less than the sum of its parts, although still enjoyable as it is.

The Ultramarines movie makes me happy. I'm not sure if the movie itself is what does it, or if it's the way the movie treated chaos marines (like 3rd or 4th edition Chaos marines, a total joke of a threat), or if I just enjoy imagining big name British Actors in tiny sound booths screaming For The Emperor!

I like Xanadu.

I liked john Carter but it suffers from the same thing as all the 1930s pulp characters in film. It doesnt matter how good the movie is they all tank in the box office.

John Carter lacks a sense of proportionality. It was fine as a fish out of water adventure. But by the end the movie is completely out of control, scale-wise, and it’s pretty hard to care about what’s going on in this visual cacophany.

I have discussed at length on this forum how bad I think TLJ is but TLJ is a much, much better movie than The Predator.

 Ghool wrote:
Pacific Rim Uprising.

If you like Kaiju movies it's one of the beat ever made. I think movie goers expected too much from a giant robot and monster film made for 10 year old kids.
The non stop action and amazing effects are worth a lot more to me in this genre than a story without plot holes.

I thoroughly enjoyed Pacific Rim but it´s successor failed big time because the giant bots moved too fast and the pilots were snotnosed green teenagers like in a Power Rangers show. Also one of the brats designed a mech on her own. Really? That alone took me out of the movie. Another stupid thing was that they included the female lead protagonist from the first movie only to kill her off. The people responsible for that crime need to go back to school in order to learn what Fan Service means.
The only good thing about this movie was the role one of the scientists played. This was nice and unexpected. At least the movie got me motivated to paint my third IK. Still one to go, though.

I really liked the 2013 Lone Ranger movie; Pirates of the Caribbean felt like the writers/director had lost control of it pretty quickly and it became about Johnny Depp being silly, Lone Ranger felt like it managed to harness Johnny Depp being silly as a force to make the movie entertaining without letting him derail it.

Last Jedi felt like about 70% of a good movie buried inside a bad movie to me. There were a lot of good scenes and good ideas that got buried inside bad framing; they explore bits of the universe we don't usually get to see, and consider the logistics of running a rebellion way more than I ever expected Star Wars to do, but it gets buried in the stern-chase gibberish and all the angry-buzzword-shouting about the purple-haired admiral. I wouldn't say I liked it when everyone else hated it or hated it when everyone else liked it, but I'm way more indifferent about it than everyone else seems to be.

 AnomanderRake wrote:
Last Jedi felt like about 70% of a good movie buried inside a bad movie to me.

That's one of the things about it that annoys me the most. We had a thread about salvaging TLJ with minimal changes, and there were a lot of good ideas there that would have turned the whole movie around.

Of course, there were also suggestions along the lines of 'start over from the beginning of TFA' too, which hardly qualifies as 'minimal' changes, but some people think DisneyWars is just that unsalvageable....

 Strg Alt wrote:

 Ghool wrote:
Pacific Rim Uprising.

If you like Kaiju movies it's one of the beat ever made. I think movie goers expected too much from a giant robot and monster film made for 10 year old kids.
The non stop action and amazing effects are worth a lot more to me in this genre than a story without plot holes.

I thoroughly enjoyed Pacific Rim but it´s successor failed big time because the giant bots moved too fast and the pilots were snotnosed green teenagers like in a Power Rangers show. Also one of the brats designed a mech on her own. Really? That alone took me out of the movie. Another stupid thing was that they included the female lead protagonist from the first movie only to kill her off. The people responsible for that crime need to go back to school in order to learn what Fan Service means.
The only good thing about this movie was the role one of the scientists played. This was nice and unexpected. At least the movie got me motivated to paint my third IK. Still one to go, though.

See it through a 10 year old boys eyes and not an adults.
When you start looking at it as a kid would, those 'snot nosed Power Rangers' make you realize why it was done that way. Honestly, I think nerds take their entertainment way too seriously.

Yeah like why even care about movies? That’s for nerds!

Pacific Rim 2 is a piece of gak. I feel bad for John Boyega.

The Dark Crystal.

The responses I get are “Oh the creepy muppet movie.”

... people can’t apreciate a good Jim Henson classic!

I would say the Last Jedi. I personnaly think it was one of the best Starwars movie made. I prefer it to the Return of the Jedi ranking at fourth best movie in the franchise (to me its basically Empire Strikes Back, A New Hope, Rogue One and the Last Jedi). While the movie received good critique from many movie critique, it was panned by many adult fans of the franchise. Come to think of it, I also enjoyed the animated Clone War movie and it spawned an excellent TV show.

I also liked Pacific Rim 2. I wanted giant robots fight giant monsters and I saw lots of giant robots fight lots of giant monsters thus I got what I asked for. The first one was better though. In the same way, the Power Ranger movie was kinda good probably way better then its source material would normally allow it to be.

The latest Pirates of the Caribbean was also very good, probably the second best of the bunch.

I don't even know if the movie was translated in english (it's a Tai movie that was co-produced by a French guy so it was also released in French) called Le Sabre du Tigre. It's the greatest worst movie of all time. Seriously, I have watched a LOT of very gakky movie for laughs and this thing is so bad it sits in the same place then the Room except the Room is very borind drama while Le Sabre du Tigre is an action movie with a descent pace (but oh so bad). If you speak French you got to find this one. Every line out of three and every plot point of the movie can be transformed into a meme. It's bad in an extraordinary way.

 Jjohnso11 wrote:
The Dark Crystal.

The responses I get are “Oh the creepy muppet movie.”

... people can’t apreciate a good Jim Henson classic!

Really? I grew up on that movie. I think I had 2-3 copies on VHS. I cannot recall ever meeting a person that hated it.

My movie is Underworld. I don't know why, but I really like the first one. It was just, good. Enjoyable. Nothing felt forced and the movies flow felt right. Plus, Kate Beckinsale. However, I am the only person I know that likes it.

 Manchu wrote:
Yeah like why even care about movies? That’s for nerds!

Pacific Rim 2 is a piece of gak. I feel bad for John Boyega.

I can say the same about SW 7 and 8 actually, or the even more terrible The Circle. With Pacific Rim 2 he redeemed himself.

But I wouldn't feel bad for John Boyega because I'm sure shooting movies like those ones should be fun anyway and the salary is decent enough

Predator 2. It's just so fun. I love Danny Glover in it and it fleshes out predators in a cool way while not being stupid.
And most Importantly the predator is actually in most of it and I'm not watching 5 hours of people going through the jungle.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Predator 2. It's just so fun. I love Danny Glover in it and it fleshes out predators in a cool way while not being stupid.
And most Importantly the predator is actually in most of it and I'm not watching 5 hours of people going through the jungle.

I loved it, including seeing mort downey get punched in the mouth and the predator's showing honor at the end.

DarthDiggler wrote:
The funniest movie I ever saw was Brain Donors.

I really liked Ang Lee’s Hulk.

In school I give out timed quizzes and I time them by song lengths just like Hudson Hawk!!

Ang Lee's The Hulk is better than the subsequent Incredible Hulk. If you disagree, you're just wrong. Also, I quite like Battleship; an hour and change of enjoyable nonsense.

 Dreadwinter wrote:


My movie is Underworld. I don't know why, but I really like the first one. It was just, good. Enjoyable. Nothing felt forced and the movies flow felt right. Plus, Kate Beckinsale. However, I am the only person I know that likes it.

You're not alone man, I really dig Underworld as well. I actually thought each film was better than the one that came before until we got Blood Wars. That one just wasn't good.

 creeping-deth87 wrote:

 Dreadwinter wrote:


My movie is Underworld. I don't know why, but I really like the first one. It was just, good. Enjoyable. Nothing felt forced and the movies flow felt right. Plus, Kate Beckinsale. However, I am the only person I know that likes it.

You're not alone man, I really dig Underworld as well. I actually thought each film was better than the one that came before until we got Blood Wars. That one just wasn't good.

It helps that Kate Beckinsale is just so gorgeous but I love the overall look and style of the Underworld films - Bill Nighy and Derek Jacoby seemed to be having great fun as well.

 AndrewGPaul wrote:

DarthDiggler wrote:
The funniest movie I ever saw was Brain Donors.

I really liked Ang Lee’s Hulk.

In school I give out timed quizzes and I time them by song lengths just like Hudson Hawk!!

Ang Lee's The Hulk is better than the subsequent Incredible Hulk. If you disagree, you're just wrong. Also, I quite like Battleship; an hour and change of enjoyable nonsense.

Agreed on The Hulk, not with you on Battleship.

I friggin' LOVED Pandorum, though it got poor reviews.

Ditto with Boondock saints, though everyone I've ever met who has seen it loved that movie.

Twilight.

Yeah, you heard me.

 Kap'n Krump wrote:
I friggin' LOVED Pandorum, though it got poor reviews.

Ditto with Boondock saints, though everyone I've ever met who has seen it loved that movie.

I hated Boondock Saints. So did my wife. But it's cool that there are people with different tastes making movies.


Er, I mean, Liking something I hate is wrong.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
Twilight.

Yeah, you heard me.

The friend who introduced me to Game of Thrones swears by Twilight (the book). I bought a copy but never worked up the nerve to read it.

I like the George Clooney's batman, it's probably my favorite one along with the first Tim Burton's episode.

Definitely not a masterpiece but IMHO a batman movie should be exactly like that in the attitude. Quoting Heath Ledger's Joker: "Why is batman so serious?". If the last 5 movies involving batman had more comedy attitude I'd definitely appreciate them more, like the MCU movies which are basically cartoons and how superheroes movies should be.

 Blackie wrote:
I like the George Clooney's batman, it's probably my favorite one along with the first Tim Burton's episode.

Definitely not a masterpiece but IMHO a batman movie should be exactly like that in the attitude. Quoting Heath Ledger's Joker: "Why is batman so serious?". If the last 5 movies involving batman had more comedy attitude I'd definitely appreciate them more, like the MCU movies which are basically cartoons and how superheroes movies should be.

No, no! That movie killed comic book movies for a decade.

It was genre defining, sure, but that definition was "AVOID CONTACT WITH EYES".

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Blackie wrote:
I like the George Clooney's batman, it's probably my favorite one along with the first Tim Burton's episode.

Definitely not a masterpiece but IMHO a batman movie should be exactly like that in the attitude. Quoting Heath Ledger's Joker: "Why is batman so serious?". If the last 5 movies involving batman had more comedy attitude I'd definitely appreciate them more, like the MCU movies which are basically cartoons and how superheroes movies should be.

No, no! That movie killed comic book movies for a decade.

It was genre defining, sure, but that definition was "AVOID CONTACT WITH EYES".

In my opinion that was a good thing!!! Marvel movies actually started being released just 3 years later with the first X-men. DC movies? That batman should have been the last one

I certainly prefer one comic book movie in 3-4 years than 45 of them (also including tv series) every f***ing year

Technically, the X-Men movies are not Marvel movies, as they were made and released by Fox, not Marvel. With Disney acquiring Fox, I look forward to seeing what Marvel can do with the X-Men.

To each their own. I prefer having plenty of choices for movies to go see, instead of waiting for endless rom-coms, LCD coms, and overdone dramas to pass by...

On subject, I rather liked The Shadow with Alec Baldwin.

 Vulcan wrote:
Technically, the X-Men movies are not Marvel movies, as they were made and released by Fox, not Marvel. With Disney acquiring Fox, I look forward to seeing what Marvel can do with the X-Men.

To each their own. I prefer having plenty of choices for movies to go see, instead of waiting for endless rom-coms, LCD coms, and overdone dramas to pass by...

Ugh, I didn't know about disney acquiring fox, very sad news as it would probably ruin my favorite superhero franchise.

I also prefer having planty of choices for movies to see, that's why I'm not a fan of the current state since there are basically only superhero movies among high budget films. Now that MI6 was released I fear I have to wait another 2-3 years to see a new solid action movie that isn't based on superheroes.

As was said, to each their own. But I like tuning in for the next MCU film like people used to tune in for their next episode of a tv show.

The MCU put that format on the big screen with each episode being a nice big self contained story AND a piece of the bigger narrative. I don't care for fox and sonys and WBs attempts to keep pace. But I do appreciate the one quality series we have.

Please carry on discussing the topic of the other three threads Techpriestsupport started on [allegedly] bad movies ITT. Thanks!

I kinda wish you had just merged them all together into one giant thread... Like a communal cesspit.

From four ongoing conversations to... nothing.

That was productive.

A wise bear once said, only you can prevent forest fires.

Similalry, if you want to discuss the topic then ... start posting on topic!

 Manchu wrote:
Yeah like why even care about movies? That’s for nerds!

Pacific Rim 2 is a piece of gak. I feel bad for John Boyega.

Pfft. At least he got to be in the entire movie. I can't believe how they just essentially tossed away Rinko Kikuchi.

Pacific Rim deserves some kind of award for utterly cratering an IP within the span of two movies. Even the Matrix needed three.

 Ouze wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
Yeah like why even care about movies? That’s for nerds!

Pacific Rim 2 is a piece of gak. I feel bad for John Boyega.

Pfft. At least he got to be in the entire movie. I can't believe how they just essentially tossed away Rinko Kikuchi.

Pacific Rim deserves some kind of award for utterly cratering an IP within the span of two movies. Even the Matrix needed three.

Matrix 2 was awful - Not seen PR2 yet - on the list

Probably should have changed the title to general movie discussions

Which was the movie that had Colonel Sanders spouting gibberish for 20 minutes straight? I can't recall if it was the second or the third. They were both pretty terrible.

 Vulcan wrote:
From four ongoing conversations to... nothing.

That was productive.

To be fair I'm not certain which discussion topic we are supposed to continue and which ones the Mods want us to drop.

 ChargerIIC wrote:

 Vulcan wrote:
From four ongoing conversations to... nothing.

That was productive.

To be fair I'm not certain which discussion topic we are supposed to continue and which ones the Mods want us to drop.

Exactly.

To actually be fair, I posted a note in every thread I locked saying to continue the discussion here, not to drop any topic. The point is, there were four threads about very similar things and there only needed to be one, Or, as it seems, there doesn’t even need to be one at this point.

They weren't really very similar things, though. Two of them were opposites, which just causes confusion if discussed in the same thread.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Besides, I though Dakka liked having more traffic.

They absolutely were very similar things. I don't understand how 'continue the conversation here' is in any way ambiguous about what topic can/can't be talked about in this thread.

 creeping-deth87 wrote:
They absolutely were very similar things. I don't understand how 'continue the conversation here' is in any way ambiguous about what topic can/can't be talked about in this thread.

Because people are not having these conversations in real time refreshing every minute of every day to see what the next piece of the conversation is and respond. You might be at work for 8 hours since your last post, log in to read every comment since, and respond to any points made in that time that you find interesting. People came back to anywhere from 1-4 conversations they were having to find they had been merged and having no idea where any of those conversations were left off or what to respond to. They instead have to dig through pages of posts to look for the last thing they remember about the thread they were in before. I imagine, most, like me, decided to just not dig through the pages.

It stopped all those conversations dead in their tracks.

 creeping-deth87 wrote:
They absolutely were very similar things. I don't understand how 'continue the conversation here' is in any way ambiguous about what topic can/can't be talked about in this thread.

They had distinct topics. They were distinct enough to support a separate conversation each. By your reasoning, we should just have one big "talk about movies" thread. Do you believe that thread would generate anywhere near as much conversation?

And obviously "continue the conversation here" was inadequate: none of the conversations continued here.

Well, since no one actually wants to talk about movies ITT ...