Posts by James Garcia50

Based on what we're looking at, the shooter was positioned behind and above him (maybe up in a tree?). They totally blew it.

Jessica Morris6 said:I'm thinking about this one... hillbillyjuIt seems like Voight just managed to injure himself in some sort of clumsy, awkward way...

The footage looks a little strange to me, too... It honestly feels like it was shot from the rear.

Ah, I see where the confusion is.

Look, if someone gets hit in the upper back at that specific angle, where would the shooter even have to be standing?

And that injury to Voight is tripping me up too. It looks more like he tripped onto his own arrow—you can see the tip sticking out of his chest—and then we see him pulling it out by the shaft.

On the front side? Take a closer look, brighteagle39.

@Jessica Morris6,
It’s been a minute since I watched him (he was always a favorite), but I think you hit the nail on the head. Directors get blinded by their own vision sometimes, don't they?

David Price5 said:He’s just doing it for the ratings or to help the couples (the ones left behind in the house). They walk in angry and leave with fake smiles..

Honestly, I think he's just chasing the views too. If someone happens to get helped along the way, fine, whatever.

Either way, it's a weird, one-of-a-kind movie.

I've finally accepted that a therapist is basically some kind of superhuman or an alien or whatever, but honestly, even after three days, I still can't wrap my head around why they actually do what they do.

Karen Smith9 said:That's the thing—I'd much rather sit down with a good book than deal with TV series.😁

You really have to watch it. must watch The WireOne season at a time. Slow and steady.

Karen Smith9 said:There's some truth there, but also a fair amount of nonsense. One solid 90-minute movie is better than any series spanning four seasons or more. I don't watch TV shows less because of the stomach aches they give me after a few episodes, though—it's just that I'll never understand the appeal of following one long story through endless installments. It reminds me of those old ladies back home reading serialized novels. Breaking Bad? Please, it's just a violent soap opera, nothing else. Total boredom, honestly—I'd rather watch German silent films than any so-called "hit" series. And oh, you mentioned The Sopranos? 🤣boring shit

We're mostly on the same page, but you're going way too hard on The Sopranos; for me, that's a cult classic, right along with The Wire. 🙂

David Price5 said:I've said it before. Everything up until Season 3 was just a warm-up; that's when the real fighting actually starts.

I honestly wonder how much sense your ratings actually make. I could easily list a few examples where something has a terrible score but I absolutely love it, or things rated over an 8 that I think are total garbage. It seems like today's younger movie buffs struggle to provide any real arguments for why a film is good; instead, I constantly run into comments like, "It’s great because it has a high rating on IMDb."😂

Trash movies are always such a mess. People tend to judge them by the same standards they use for serious cinema, which just doesn't work. For those kinds of films, you really need to find specialized critics who actually get it.

That's not really how you calculate it. You can't possibly know exactly when a script wraps up. These things can drag on for years, especially when you're constantly swapping out writers mid-stream. It’s the same story with TV pilots—they can take forever to get right.

People who only care about high IMDb ratings are going to think this movie is actually good.
Having an actual argument isn't trolling.

Yeah, you're making some points... but none of them seem to be coming from your side.

Aged 18-29 90772 8.3
Males Aged 18-29 39082 7.8
Females Aged 18-29 51690 8.6
Aged 30-44 24307 7.5
Males Aged 30-44 11111 6.8
Females Aged 30-44 13196 8.3

It’s actually one of those rare series where women showed up in higher numbers to vote.

It happened a long time ago, but you don't value anyone's perspective except your own. I guess that's just how some people are—they just need to be right while everyone else is wrong.

Don't mess with Vampire Diaries fans, they'll eat you alive 😂🤣😛

Who else besides the fanatics actually watches and rates this stuff?

David Price5 said:It's tough to know how much work went into those scripts, when production actually started, or what counts as the final day... so yeah, more filler.

It's obvious a professional gourmet isn't the same as someone like me, who is just a natural foodie.

All you can conclude is that this is my opinion. I don't feel any need to emphasize that in every single post. I write for myself (who else would I be writing for?)...

Then don't be surprised if we see debates like this—or even worse ones—down the road. It's not just about your opinion; it's about how you back it up and the arguments you use. Otherwise, people will just assume you're trolling.

It was deserved. It was one of the most talked-about episodes.

It doesn't matter if it's the first day or the last; all that counts is the enrollment I was talking about. It takes years to make a movie like that. Ever wonder how much blood, sweat, and tears actually goes into a single frame?Not exactly. You don't just whip up a series in a month maybe.

David Price5 said:It's tough to know how much work went into those scripts, when production actually started, or what counts as the final day... so yeah, more filler.

It's obvious a professional gourmet isn't the same as someone like me, who is just a natural foodie.

All you can conclude is that this is my opinion. I don't feel any need to emphasize that in every single post. I write for myself (who else would I be writing for?)...

Then don't be surprised if we see debates like this—or even worse ones—down the road. It's not just about your opinion; it's about how you back it up and the arguments you use. Otherwise, people will just assume you're trolling.

It was deserved. It was one of the most talked-about episodes.

That's exactly what the people will think—those who only think a movie is good because it has some high rating on IMDb.
Having an actual argument isn't trolling. Is there a difference?

David Price5 said:But they exist. That’s why I don't call them idiots; they spend that much time crafting the script.

The ones who make this their full-time job just aren't credible.

So does that mean music critics, artists, or foodies aren't credible either?

I said it before and I stand by it:

Quote: never a series is higher quality than a film. A series is just filler for the casual viewer at home who wants to see what happened before or after the movie.

So, based on that "never," we can conclude that no series will ever be better than any film.

I’ve got my own favorites that don't run longer than a year.
These slow burners... let's just say they aren't stupid. They're just filler.

David Price5 said:But they exist. That’s why I don't call them idiots; they spend that much time crafting the script.

The ones who make this their full-time job just aren't credible.

So does that mean music critics, artists, or foodies aren't credible either?

I said it before and I stand by it:

Quote: never a series is higher quality than a film. A series is just filler for the casual viewer at home who wants to see what happened before or after the movie.

So, based on that "never," we can conclude that no series will ever be better than any film.

Obviously a pro foodie isn't the same as me, being a natural foodie.

All you can really take away is that this is my opinion. I don't feel the need to spell that out in every single post. I'm speaking for myself (who else would I be speaking for?)...

David Price5 said:But honestly, it's rare for any script to stay in its original state without some changes... and just like that, a month maybe has passed.

It doesn't bother me. I don't care if people agree with my taste; what matters is that I don't change my opinion on a movie or show just to please a crowd of 300 viewers.

But we aren't talking about ordinary viewers here. These are people whose full-time job is watching, commenting on, and rating movies—and now shows.

I am very careful when I recommend something. I always add a disclaimer, making it clear it's just my personal take, or warning that they might not like it even if I did.

That is exactly what we should all be doing. No issues there.

I don't ask. I don't care about the opinions of either the audience or the critics.

Fine, the audience is one thing, but a consensus among critics? They aren't exactly teenagers...

If you read our film section, you'll see why ratings fluctuate: maybe someone related to a situation, or their aunt or sister went through something similar, or an actor is hot, or an actress is stunning, or the soundtrack is cool, or someone has a voice so captivating it overshadows the whole film (like Ellen Page), or the movie simply isn't good because it isn't some heavy American social drama...

As long as there's an explanation.

An impression backed by solid arguments simply leaves no room for debate.

Of course..

But all of this started because of what you said.

Quote: never a series is better than a movie; a series is just eye candy for the casual viewer who wants to know what happened before or after the film.

That's why this whole debate kicked off...

It isn't even responsible.

In general? Is it a series based on a movie, or a movie based on a series?...

Month maybe, years not (unless I'm feeling crazy).

David Price5 said:But honestly, it's rare for any script to stay in its original state without some changes... and just like that, a month maybe has passed.

It doesn't bother me. I don't care if people agree with my taste; what matters is that I don't change my opinion on a movie or show just to please a crowd of 300 viewers.

But we aren't talking about ordinary viewers here. These are people whose full-time job is watching, commenting on, and rating movies—and now shows.

I am very careful when I recommend something. I always add a disclaimer, making it clear it's just my personal take, or warning that they might not like it even if I did.

That is exactly what we should all be doing. No issues there.

I don't ask. I don't care about the opinions of either the audience or the critics.

Fine, the audience is one thing, but a consensus among critics? They aren't exactly teenagers...

If you read our film section, you'll see why ratings fluctuate: maybe someone related to a situation, or their aunt or sister went through something similar, or an actor is hot, or an actress is stunning, or the soundtrack is cool, or someone has a voice so captivating it overshadows the whole film (like Ellen Page), or the movie simply isn't good because it isn't some heavy American social drama...

As long as there's an explanation.

An impression backed by solid arguments simply leaves no room for debate.

Of course..

But all of this started because of what you said.

Quote: never a series is better than a movie; a series is just eye candy for the casual viewer who wants to know what happened before or after the film.

That's why this whole debate kicked off...

It isn't even responsible.

In general? Is it a series based on a movie, or a movie based on a series?...

How can you trust people who make that their entire identity? They just aren't credible.

David Price5 said:But honestly, it's rare for any script to stay in its original state without some changes... and just like that, a month maybe has passed.

It doesn't bother me. I don't care if people agree with my taste; what matters is that I don't change my opinion on a movie or show just to please a crowd of 300 viewers.

But we aren't talking about ordinary viewers here. These are people whose full-time job is watching, commenting on, and rating movies—and now shows.

I am very careful when I recommend something. I always add a disclaimer, making it clear it's just my personal take, or warning that they might not like it even if I did.

That is exactly what we should all be doing. No issues there.

I don't ask. I don't care about the opinions of either the audience or the critics.

Fine, the audience is one thing, but a consensus among critics? They aren't exactly teenagers...

If you read our film section, you'll see why ratings fluctuate: maybe someone related to a situation, or their aunt or sister went through something similar, or an actor is hot, or an actress is stunning, or the soundtrack is cool, or someone has a voice so captivating it overshadows the whole film (like Ellen Page), or the movie simply isn't good because it isn't some heavy American social drama...

As long as there's an explanation.

An impression backed by solid arguments simply leaves no room for debate.

Of course..

But all of this started because of what you said.

Quote: never a series is better than a movie; a series is just eye candy for the casual viewer who wants to know what happened before or after the film.

That's why this whole debate kicked off...

It isn't even responsible.

In general? Is it a series based on a movie, or a movie based on a series?...

I said what I said, and I meant it.

Quote: never a series is better than a movie. A series is just eye candy for the suburban dad who needs to know what happened before or after the film.

David Price5 said:I was speaking in general terms here. Whether it’s an original work or an adaptation, scriptwriting can take three days—like a quick Rocky montage—or it can take years.

There are no rules. You could produce five seasons with thirteen episodes each and still have everything you filmed turn out to be total garbage.

Exactly. But I would say NEVER. That was my main point. A series will never be better than the movie.

In general? Or a series based on a movie, or a movie based on a series?...

All these lovely people either have their own criteria or they don't, but to me, that doesn't matter in this situation.

The issue is that these same people clearly have standards when they happen to agree with your taste in movies, but suddenly those standards vanish the moment a series shows up. Is the problem with them, or is it something else?

No mention at all, David Price5?
The point is that a vote of three hundred random people doesn't make a film or series good. That's all there is to it.

Of course. But then you have to wonder how statistically you just happen to find three hundred random folks who disagree with you in one place... only for those same folks to suddenly align with your opinion on movies. I suspect your views on film will largely align with the consensus of, say, professional critics.

If only it were true, but it simply isn't.
Test screenings. Films get cut and edited specifically because of the audience.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_screening

Sure, you could spend years writing a love letter too, but those are exceptions.

David Price5 said:I was speaking in general terms here. Whether it’s an original work or an adaptation, scriptwriting can take three days—like a quick Rocky montage—or it can take years.

There are no rules. You could produce five seasons with thirteen episodes each and still have everything you filmed turn out to be total garbage.

Exactly. But I would say NEVER. That was my main point. A series will never be better than the movie.

In general? Or a series based on a movie, or a movie based on a series?...

All these lovely people either have their own criteria or they don't, but to me, that doesn't matter in this situation.

The issue is that these same people clearly have standards when they happen to agree with your taste in movies, but suddenly those standards vanish the moment a series shows up. Is the problem with them, or is it something else?

No mention at all, David Price5?
The point is that a vote of three hundred random people doesn't make a film or series good. That's all there is to it.

Of course. But then you have to wonder how statistically you just happen to find three hundred random folks who disagree with you in one place... only for those same folks to suddenly align with your opinion on movies. I suspect your views on film will largely align with the consensus of, say, professional critics.

If only it were true, but it simply isn't.
Test screenings. Films get cut and edited specifically because of the audience.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_screening

Doesn't matter to me. I don't care who agrees with my taste; what matters is that I don't shift my opinion on a movie or show just to please some crowd of 300 viewers.

And I’m always careful when recommending something. I make sure to frame it as just my own opinion, or warn someone that they might not like it even if I thought it was great.

David Price5 said:I was speaking in general terms here. Whether it’s an original work or an adaptation, scriptwriting can take three days—like a quick Rocky montage—or it can take years.

There are no rules. You could produce five seasons with thirteen episodes each and still have everything you filmed turn out to be total garbage.

Exactly. But I would say NEVER. That was my main point. A series will never be better than the movie.

In general? Or a series based on a movie, or a movie based on a series?...

All these lovely people either have their own criteria or they don't, but to me, that doesn't matter in this situation.

The issue is that these same people clearly have standards when they happen to agree with your taste in movies, but suddenly those standards vanish the moment a series shows up. Is the problem with them, or is it something else?

No mention at all, David Price5?
The point is that a vote of three hundred random people doesn't make a film or series good. That's all there is to it.

Of course. But then you have to wonder how statistically you just happen to find three hundred random folks who disagree with you in one place... only for those same folks to suddenly align with your opinion on movies. I suspect your views on film will largely align with the consensus of, say, professional critics.

If only it were true, but it simply isn't.
Test screenings. Films get cut and edited specifically because of the audience.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_screening

I don't wonder. I don't give much weight to either the audience or the critics.

If you read our film section, you'll see why ratings fluctuate: either someone relates to the plot personally, or it reminds them of something their aunt or sister went through, or the actor is hot, or the actress has a great body, or the soundtrack is cool, or someone has a voice so distinctive it overshadows the whole film (like Ellen Page), or the movie just isn't good because it isn't some heavy social drama...

An impression backed by actual arguments simply has no competition.

silvertiger11 said:Honestly, I find it hard to believe anyone would sit through multiple seasons of a show they actually hate just to spitefully bump up its audience score. That logic just doesn't hold water. A movie is a one-off event, so you're going to get a much wider, more unpredictable spectrum of opinions.

Besides, TV series have a natural edge over films. In this day and age, creators can actually gauge audience sentiment and pivot the story's direction accordingly. A movie, on the other hand, is pretty much set in stone once production wraps.

Exactly.
A series is just one long string of concessions to the viewers, whereas a movie is what you decided to make from the jump—there's no room for post-mortem adjustments.

David Price5 said:

Who spends years working on just one single movie? An idiot?

A huge portion of filmmaking involves all that extra work... when you consider how long it takes to write the script, hunt down producers, actually shoot it, and handle all those script revisions.

Quote: never a series is ever better than a film. A series is just filler for the casual viewer at home who wants to know what happened before or after the movie.
You can wrap everything up in ninety minutes.

Well, you could cram everything into five minutes too. But the issue is that you claim that's all that's needed, which is just silly.

The proof is in the current trend of churning out series based on movies.
Take Fargo, one of the best films ever, and then go watch the series based on it.🙄

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/tv/fargo/s01/
Clearly, these people have no taste. They didn't have any taste when they were rating the movie either.
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/fargo/

Yeah, I never watch ratings for movies or series, I have my own criteria.

Obviously you do. Whether they are actually worth mentioning is another matter entirely...

We aren't talking about the volume; we're talking about scripts that are basically written on a whim, ripped off from some Asian or European movie, or just lifted straight from a book.
Nah, there's plenty of it.
I was thinking about my favorite directors—the ones who actually sink their teeth into a single project for years. Honestly, I don't even care about anyone else.

David Price5 said:

Who spends years working on just one single movie? An idiot?

A huge portion of filmmaking involves all that extra work... when you consider how long it takes to write the script, hunt down producers, actually shoot it, and handle all those script revisions.

Quote: never a series is ever better than a film. A series is just filler for the casual viewer at home who wants to know what happened before or after the movie.
You can wrap everything up in ninety minutes.

Well, you could cram everything into five minutes too. But the issue is that you claim that's all that's needed, which is just silly.

The proof is in the current trend of churning out series based on movies.
Take Fargo, one of the best films ever, and then go watch the series based on it.🙄

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/tv/fargo/s01/
Clearly, these people have no taste. They didn't have any taste when they were rating the movie either.
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/fargo/

Yeah, I never watch ratings for movies or series, I have my own criteria.

Obviously you do. Whether they are actually worth mentioning is another matter entirely...

There are no rules. You could churn out five seasons with thirteen episodes each and still have everything you filmed turn out to be total garbage. Why even bother?

David Price5 said:

Who spends years working on just one single movie? An idiot?

A huge portion of filmmaking involves all that extra work... when you consider how long it takes to write the script, hunt down producers, actually shoot it, and handle all those script revisions.

Quote: never a series is ever better than a film. A series is just filler for the casual viewer at home who wants to know what happened before or after the movie.
You can wrap everything up in ninety minutes.

Well, you could cram everything into five minutes too. But the issue is that you claim that's all that's needed, which is just silly.

The proof is in the current trend of churning out series based on movies.
Take Fargo, one of the best films ever, and then go watch the series based on it.🙄

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/tv/fargo/s01/
Clearly, these people have no taste. They didn't have any taste when they were rating the movie either.
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/fargo/

Yeah, I never watch ratings for movies or series, I have my own criteria.

Obviously you do. Whether they are actually worth mentioning is another matter entirely...

Everyone seems to have their own little set of standards or whatever, but honestly? In today's world, I couldn't care less.

David Price5 said:

Who spends years working on just one single movie? An idiot?

A huge portion of filmmaking involves all that extra work... when you consider how long it takes to write the script, hunt down producers, actually shoot it, and handle all those script revisions.

Quote: never a series is ever better than a film. A series is just filler for the casual viewer at home who wants to know what happened before or after the movie.
You can wrap everything up in ninety minutes.

Well, you could cram everything into five minutes too. But the issue is that you claim that's all that's needed, which is just silly.

The proof is in the current trend of churning out series based on movies.
Take Fargo, one of the best films ever, and then go watch the series based on it.🙄

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/tv/fargo/s01/
Clearly, these people have no taste. They didn't have any taste when they were rating the movie either.
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/fargo/

Yeah, I never watch ratings for movies or series, I have my own criteria.

Obviously you do. Whether they are actually worth mentioning is another matter entirely...

What kind of mention was that, David Price5?
Just because a movie or show wins a bunch of awards doesn't mean it's actually any good. It’s really just about the hype, isn't it?

Angela Alvarez10 said:To me, it honestly feels like TV shows can actually be higher quality than movies. It’s kind of fascinating, really—how a writing team tasked with crafting 22 episodes per season can deliver much better material than someone spending years grinding away on a single ninety-minute film.

Plus, I'd argue you just get more invested in series. You actually grow to love the characters and everything... you end up becoming a genuine fan, which makes it easy to hit that higher rating.

Who spends years working on just one single movie? An idiot?

Quote: never a series is better than a movie. A series is just filler for some suburban guy who needs to know what happened before or after the film.
You can cover just about everything in ninety minutes. Or can you?
The latest trend is just churning out endless series based on movies. Isn't that just the same old story?
Take a look. FargoOne of the best movies ever made, followed by the series of the same name. Why wouldn't you? 🙄

Yeah, I never bother checking ratings for movies or shows. Why would I? I've got my own criteria.

Yeah, Frejack is based on that Sheckley book, so I’d definitely give it a watch.
By the way, who is this Tarsem Singh director? Never heard of him...

Even you saw it, and others chimed in on the thread too: , , , , and plenty more. It’s about whether you actually absorb the film, not just how long it runs. But once you've soaked in the first act and feel like stepping away to brew some coffee? That's where it's over. 😳

For any real cinephile, runtime is a total non-issue. If the movie is actually good, you won't even notice the clock ticking; if it's garbage, even 85 minutes feels like an eternity.