Armada Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 No, you're a troll because you made an exorbitant amount of posts about how much you dislike a single movie, but didn't come up with any actual criticisms, just threw banal insults at the movie and those who enjoyed it. Then when people make replies with a legitimate counterpoint, you don't reply, you just go back to talking about how much you dislike it. You didn't even post your favourite moves of the year, just spewed insults at the Avengers. We get it. You don't like it. Why you have such a hard-on for insulting it is what I don't get. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McBackup Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 "Troll" is such a childish statement, but if you really must know.. Too me it was an over hyped and then an overrated movie. There was nothing special about the Avengers, the plot had been nothing special and nothing to draw me in to enjoy it. The typical: Villain threatens earth and the super heroes need to save it story. What is special about that? The Loki guy was merely a "villain" who wouldn't scare your grandma. Bane(Tom Hardy) from Batman and Silva(Jarvier Bardem) from Skyfall were much more "epic" and did absolutely PHENOMENAL jobs. The acting was average at best, with the exception of a few including Robert Downey Jr. The dialogue was dreadful, it wasn't funny and nor was it gritty or dramatic, the whole thing going on between the superheroes was incredibly cheesy especially with Iron Man and Captain America. The only thing it really had going for it was the action which was decent. I think what gets me most is how over hyped this movie was and the reaction it got. To put it on a top 10 movie list is an insult to the other great movies we saw this year which actually deserved a better reception. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jägermeister Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 That's what you call entertainment? Just cause something incredibly big and overrated is popular doesn't mean its good. Avengers is like Nickleback. For some reason a lot of people like it yet its terrible music. Maybe I went overboard saying it was a terrible movie, but it wasn't a great one either especially since it shouldn't be earning the 2nd spot on a top 10 list (Your list). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McBackup Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 The thing is, the Avengers is completely tongue-in-cheek. It knows it's a goofy movie and runs with it. No one goes into the Avengers looking for anything cerebral and poignant, but as far as fun, summer blockbusters go it's pretty damn good. It managed to be fun without being stupid, unlike something of Transformers' ilk. Obviously people are going to disagree with me, and that's cool. That's what this thread is for. But actually discuss the movie, don't just throw childish insults. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samuel Påhlsson Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 Martin Freeman as Bilbo sure saved Peter Jackson's first of three. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmployeeoftheMonth Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 I thought Moonrise Kingdom was one of the worst movies of the year. Couldn't get through 30 mins of it. My family was laughing on how highly rated it was. On the other hand we just finished watching Pitcher Perfect and I thought it was actually pretty good. A lot better than I thought it was going to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmployeeoftheMonth Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 arguing about subjective things is silly? you should know full well that saying "the dark knight rises pretends to have meaning, but doesn't, and therefore the avengers is better because it doesn't even try" is a controversial opinion, and pretty damn hipster-ish in itself. but then again, using the word 'hipster' in any context should be avoided at all costs, because in subjective conversation (especially online), every person is someone else's hipster on a semi-related note--and not necessarily a criticism of the exchange between Employee and Armada--i wish CDC users were better at discussing the arts without getting so offended if their taste is put on trial. yes, it's all subjective, but opinion on subjective matters can really be interesting, if those opinions are backed up with substance and critical thinking. god forbid someone begins to re-evulate how they read, hear, play, or view their escapism of choice! personally, i thought TDKR was good for what it was (imo, my idea of a "good" popcorn movie should have meaning, or at least try to have meaning), whereas i can't even bring myself to watch The Avengers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmployeeoftheMonth Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 Just because I know the ending of a movie doesn't hinder it - because if that was the case, I wouldn't see Lincoln (because he dies at the end), I wouldn't see Django (because I predicted the ending), I wouldn't see Dark Zero Thirty (because Osama dies at the end).... I could go on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squeak Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 Jesus Christ spoilers man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Down by the River Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 Jesus Christ spoilers man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squeak Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 Bahaha. Glad I'm the only one in the room right now. I saw Django Unchained on the weekend, really liked it, particularly the first hour or so. Christoph Waltz delivers every line with such patience, its brilliant. One of my favourite actors; makes me want to watch Inglorious Bastards again. I also saw Cloud Atlas, which I liked, but at sometimes found it being "odd for the sake of being odd" (similar to Inception). I love cerebral movies if the cerebral aspect fits with the plot/story of the movie. Don't be complicated just for the sake of being complicated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McBackup Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 I honestly thought Foxx was the weakest part of the movie. We saw very little character development from him, and he was always out-acted by whoever he was with (Waltz, Jackson, Dicaprio, Goggins.) It really felt like Schultz was the protagonist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squeak Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 I honestly thought Foxx was the weakest part of the movie. We saw very little character development from him, and he was always out-acted by whoever he was with (Waltz, Jackson, Dicaprio, Goggins.) It really felt like Schultz was the protagonist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McBackup Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 Very little character development? If anything - he was the character who DID develop. He learned how to behave around the people he despised; how to 'act' like Schultz was telling him throughout the first half. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Psycho_Path Posted January 10, 2013 Share Posted January 10, 2013 That's what you call entertainment? Just cause something incredibly big and overrated is popular doesn't mean its good. Avengers is like Nickleback. For some reason a lot of people like it yet its terrible music. Maybe I went overboard saying it was a terrible movie, but it wasn't a great one either especially since it shouldn't be earning the 2nd spot on a top 10 list (Your list). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squeak Posted January 10, 2013 Share Posted January 10, 2013 Not really, we didn't get that good of an impression of his character developing, especially considering he was 'acting' for half the movie. He seemed very one-dimensional. If anything he was the faceless vehicle for revenge and slaughter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Humble Rodent Posted January 10, 2013 Share Posted January 10, 2013 I honestly thought Foxx was the weakest part of the movie. We saw very little character development from him, and he was always out-acted by whoever he was with (Waltz, Jackson, Dicaprio, Goggins.) It really felt like Schultz was the protagonist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hume Posted January 10, 2013 Share Posted January 10, 2013 i forgot about that whole KKK scene, that was predictable but hilarious. QT's aussie accent was too funny as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Armada Posted January 10, 2013 Share Posted January 10, 2013 It being "overrated" and popular has nothing to do with the fact that I find it good. The writing was fantastic and the action was very good along with the CG. The actors all did a good job with the roles IMO. Think what you want though. All I can say is don't overhype a movie for yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alchemy Time Posted January 10, 2013 Share Posted January 10, 2013 What, no Breaking Dawn Part 2? C'mon, that movie was badass. BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.