CheckEmoji Community · the emoji forum
🏠 Home 🆕 What's new ❓ Unanswered 🔥 Popular 📡 RSS Members 👥 0 online log in · register
Home › casualtrucker3 › Posts

Posts by casualtrucker3

7 posts shown.

What kind of grade is that, for real? in Movies ·
I don't know about you all, but I’ve been sitting here staring at my screen for twenty minutes wondering if anyone else feels this same creeping sense of exhaustion lately? It’s like we’re all just running on a treadmill that someone keeps speeding up while we’re trying to tie our shoelaces. Does anyone else feel like the more we try to keep pace with everything happening in the country, the further behind we actually fall? I mean, really, is it even possible to stay sane when the goalposts move every single week? kaže:
Wait, isn't an average basically just the midpoint? I mean, if you're looking at a scale from zero to ten, isn't five right there in the middle? 🤔

Not for me. Back in the day, I spent some time working as a sports journalist, rating soccer players for a major national newspaper. We had a pretty strict scale back then—anything starting at a 5.5 was considered a bad showing, and if you dropped to a 5 or anything below that, you were essentially failing the test. A 6 was basically just a passing grade. To put it in perspective, a 5 out of 10 would be like getting an F on a standard American grading scale. In my book, I never once gave a rating of 5/10 to anyone who actually deserved credit for their performance.

So, that’s not even really the trick, is it? The real kicker—the part that actually matters—is the idea that we should just steer clear of mediocre movies altogether, even though there aren't many left worth skipping. Why is that?

It seems like there’s an overwhelming abundance of absolute garbage out there lately. Honestly, if I look back at the movies I’ve sat through this year—and I’ve probably checked off about a hundred of them—it’s pretty depressing; roughly 90% of them couldn't even crack a 5/10 rating, which basically places them firmly in the trash category. Then you have the mediocre stuff, maybe around 8%, hovering in that uninspired middle ground between a 5.5 and a 6.5. The remaining sliver represents the actual good films, though even those can be subdivided into the very good, the masterpieces, the true spectacles, and so on. It really makes you wonder: is quality just becoming a lost art?
What kind of grade is that, for real? in Movies ·
Steven Smith16 said:I didn't catch the film myself, but I suppose what she said makes perfect sense. She calls it mediocre and gives it a 5/10, which is right in the middle—if we aren't going to bring a bell curve into this 😁—and finally suggests it can be bypassed, simply because there is an endless supply of mediocre movies out there. So, why not?

In my book, a 5/10 isn't "average"—it's actually below average. If I were grading something as truly mid-range, I'd probably be looking at a 6/10.

Sure, there are average movies out there, but they aren't exactly flooding the market. A recent example I'd personally label as the definition of "average" would be "A Most Wanted Man," which I'd give a 6/10. Even though those types of films exist, they certainly aren't as common as people make them out to be. They just aren't!

She—and now you, too—really needs to sort out her perspective. Either you possess such an incredibly precious, elite taste in cinema that you refuse to let your palate be tainted by anything even remotely mediocre, or you're just being dramatic, considering the sheer volume of actual garbage produced compared to the rare "average" film.🙏
What kind of grade is that, for real? in Movies ·
~*MiSs-AnDy*~ said:Into the Storm (2014)
The cast features Lori from The Walking Dead, Thorin from the Hobbit, and Peter Pan. Then, out of nowhere, some totally random character pops up—honestly, I didn't even catch who they were until just now. The acting was pretty mid, which really just mirrored the movie itself. As for the special effects, they weren't terrible, but let's be real, nothing spectacular there either; they're just fine. You aren't missing out on anything if you decide to skip this one.
5/10

Look, the movie is garbage; I have no idea what you were watching. First you call it mediocre, then you say people can just skip it entirely, yet you still hand it a 5/10? Just pick a side already.

btw, The Walking Dead? Hobbit? Peter Pan? What are we even talking about here?
Let's Be Cops (2014) in Movies ·
I’m not really much of a comedy watcher myself, mostly because most of them just aren't funny; in fact, they’re often so grating that I find myself giving up on them after only a few minutes. It’s actually quite a shock to see a film like this, though—a genuine testament to the fact that you can pull off something solid even when working with relatively unknown actors. It isn't exactly a cinematic masterpiece, but given the absolute tidal wave of garbage currently flooding the market, that alone raises its value significantly. Honestly, this is the first comedy I've watched that was actually worth my time since Superbad.
Let's Be Cops (2014) in Movies ·
22 Jump Street is absolute garbage. Between the actors, the plot, and the jokes, nothing about it even comes close to being as funny as Superbad.
Let's Be Cops (2014) in Movies ·
After what feels like an eternity, I’ve finally stumbled upon a comedy that doesn't make me want to claw my eyes out. Up until now, I’d only counted maybe three good ones to my name—think *Silver Streak*, *29th Street*, or *My Cousin Vinny*.

I’ve grown so cynical because most comedies churned out every single year seem designed for one purpose: to fleece some naive teenager for cash. We’re constantly bombarded with these mindless, bottom-of-the-barrel productions starring the likes of Sandra Bullock, Adam Sandler, Drew Barrymore, or just a bunch of pathetic nobodies. But this one? This one actually stands apart.

After I spent the last few years dismissing pretty much every comedy released as absolute garbage, a female friend asked me, "Wait, do you just not like comedies?" It actually gave me pause. I had reached a point where I was convinced she was right. Well, today’s viewing officially settled that debate. The acting was sharp, the story held up, and there was this one unforgettable character—not to name names, but the cop who pulls all the strings and drags his buddy into this whole programmer mess was just brilliant. He was this delightfully reckless idiot, and honestly, he carried the whole thing.

The film managed to dodge the fatal flaw that kills about 99% of comedies: it never drags, and it never resorts to a relentless barrage of primitive, low-brow jokes. It was a genuinely, very good little comedy—like a sudden bolt of lightning in a sea of trash. 6.8/10.

Keep in mind, I rarely give any movie more than an 8, so you can do the math on how much I actually enjoyed this.
The thread title is actually being a bit generous—it’s not quite true that series suit me better than movies. Honestly, if you're looking for a truly great TV series, you practically have to hunt for one with a flashlight; I feel like I only stumble upon one decent show every decade or so. Movies, on the other hand, seem to turn out "okay" much more frequently.