Olivia Barrett14 said:I think that might be one of the most irritating movies out there.
I don't know—it had a decent message, which I suppose is why the story resonated with me? Generally, I'm not much for comedies since they tend to be so poorly made—but this one played on TV so frequently that it was almost impossible to avoid watching.
I actually watched that just yesterday—honestly, it was pretty underwhelming. It wasn't funny at all, just your typical Hollywood attempt at a comedy. I much prefer the one starring Jack Black and G. Paltrow, where she plays the character transitioning from overweight to thin; at least that one felt engaging and carried a decent message.🙂
stormypanther39 said:I haven't seen the movie yet—though I likely will. So far, I'd say the first and third films are the best, followed by the second. Based on what critics are saying on Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic, the ratings are pretty low; they claim nothing new was added to Paranormal Activity 4, just more of the same "fear." Honestly, I have my doubts about whether I'll even enjoy this one. I'm expecting the same thing we saw with the second installment—we all know how that turned out, right? 😢
Yes, Paranormal Activity 4 doesn't offer anything new—it feels like it was made solely to cash in, which was disappointing. I was hoping for some actual story progression... it wasn't scary at all, but well, I suppose I'll watch the fifth one too.
Jessica Gonzalez said:I wonder why we assume that counts as progress? Sure, technology has moved forward, but I guess we can only call it progress if it actually makes movies better. People always point to digital recording, CGI, and 3D as the big leaps. To me, it feels a bit like a trick being sold to generations raised on video games—it's the same tactic used in gaming, really. I think people had just as much fun playing 2D games back on the old Super Nintendo or Game Boy.
I think you misunderstood my point. What I meant was—technology will advance in the exact way you described—by using effects to camouflage mediocre movies; so, it’s "progress" only in quotes. Of course, films like Harry Potter will look better with newer, bigger, more advanced effects down the road. But for me? I prefer films driven by atmosphere and well-developed characters—the kind of movies where flashy effects aren't even necessary.
Karen Smith9 said:First off, Tarantino borrows heavily—he doesn't even hide it—so I don't really hold that against him; it's just that people tend to exaggerate when they claim he's truly "original" or that good. Secondly, this whole comparison regarding Kubrick isn't even worth discussing. Thirdly, wasn't the entire premise of this thread that remakes are essentially pointless? If so, then debating whether we need remakes of Tarantino or Kubrick feels a bit redundant, doesn't it?
He truly is that talented and original, without any hyperbole 🙂 I don't think remakes are inherently pointless. For instance, in twenty years, we might see a remake of something like Harry Potter or Twilight simply because technology will have advanced so much. But Tarantino's films aren't built on tech—they rely on atmosphere and characters that drive the story forward. So, why would anyone bother remaking him? It seems nearly impossible. What would you even remake in Pulp Fiction? New dialogue? 🤷
Karen Smith9 said:If they’re good, fine—but 😂by the time you find out, the train has already left the station... the movie is already filmed, after all. As for the bolded part, that's a bit of a stretch... unfortunately, they've remade much bigger icons than just Tarantino.🙄
I honestly think it’s going to be incredibly rare to find anyone capable of pulling off a quality remake of his work—and frankly, I doubt anything could actually top the original. Tarantino just knows.😁
I've always had a soft spot for remakes, prequels, or even sequels—provided they actually deliver. Why not? For instance, the X-Men prequel was genuinely great. On the other hand, I firmly believe certain films, like Tarantino's, should simply be left untouched.☕
For me, there were moments where it felt truly great, followed by stretches where it fell flat—leaving me with a somewhat mediocre impression overall. The story itself is compelling, but I can't help but feel the film could have been much better.
It’s nowhere near an Oscar contender—it feels a bit... lukewarm? A little dull, really. The story is fine, and it's decent enough to watch, but S. Bullock and Tom Hanks are just supporting players here—you barely even see them... 6.5/10
redsailor15 said:And that’s exactly why people don't watch horror movies at the theater anymore!
I still go—well, only for the ones that actually catch my eye. People will always have something to say, I suppose, but today was just unbearable. I actually sent a complaint to the management; they completely ruined the experience for me.
So, I just finished watching it. To be honest, it felt more like a second installment to me—not because it was scary, but because while it was interesting, I’m already counting down the days until the fifth one. My main gripe is that the plot doesn't really unravel much; we aren't actually learning anything new, which left me feeling a bit let down.
But what truly ruined the experience for me? A group of kids sitting near my seat who wouldn't stop shouting these incredibly moronic comments throughout the entire movie. It got to the point where I actually stood up and asked to have them removed. Of course, the staff at AMC Theatres just gave them a quick "hush" instead. Honestly, I think it'll be a long time before I step foot in an AMC Theatres again.
Heading out to catch 😁 today. I'm not expecting it to top the first one—though I am curious to see how the plot unfolds (or if it just gets even more tangled)—but I'll share my thoughts once I'm out.
The first thirty minutes of 77 are just mirrors—how long can anyone actually sit through that? I honestly died of boredom and had to turn it off. Life is far too short to spend it being this bored, don't you think?☕
Nathan Myers28 said:I just tried typing Jurassic Park and AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAA into the search bar, and you know what? Absolutely nothing comes up. Seriously, what kind of country am I living in? It feels like I'm constantly being bombarded with all this Tarantino nonsense instead! Look, Jurassic Park is hands down my favorite movie of all time—and I’m sure I’m not alone in that feeling (even if I can't find any like-minded people on this specific forum). The film is a remake of Crichton's work, which won three Oscars, and honestly, the movie itself is pure perfection. The characters, the score—which shows John Williams at his absolute peak—the special effects... I mean, it’s from 1993, yet those effects still absolutely crush most of the CGI we see today. The story, everything! It was so impactful that after watching it, I actually started calling Sam Neill "Dr. Grant." Just a fair warning: please don't start any wars over this movie, or I'll end up sending you 75 private messages filled with various insults! And if anyone is planning to watch it, do yourselves a favor and read the books and the comics first—they are all masterpieces.
Good grief, such nonsensical statements... Tarantino bullshit? 🤦 Who's afraid of the big bad wolf now? ☕ Jurassic Park is actually a very well-made film, though I wouldn't go so far as to call it a masterpiece. Still, it was one of my favorite childhood movies.🙂
Hands down, the best leading lady performance I’ve ever seen!!! I have never witnessed acting quite that convincing—truly, kudos to Hilary - Oscar and then some!!! How does she even do it? Such incredible talent.🙏
The movie is fantastic; I actually sat down and watched it again just yesterday!🙂
The first time I watched it, it was good—but by the second viewing, it felt better. By the third, it was excellent, and after the fourth and fifth times, it became one of my absolute favorites. I just love this film... I really, truly love it. 🙂
I haven't seen this one yet—is it actually any good? I've watched a few different versions of Anna Karenina, but none of them really hit the mark for me... mostly because they seem to completely ignore the character of Levin.
I had no idea they were filming this—how exciting! Though, let's be honest, it could never truly capture the essence of the book. As an American literature professor, I find myself completely lost in the pages every single time I teach this text—it really is just a flawless masterpiece, isn't it? I am looking forward to seeing the film, regardless.😍