Why is everyone into series more than movies these days?

Zachary Nguyen2 said:It is.

Nah, take another look.

Cellblock 211 isn't some police procedural; it's a prison movie.

Drake is an absolute masterpiece. Honestly, trying to pin down Wire as just some cop show or movie feels like a massive understatement. Both of them dive way deeper than that, really stripping back the layers to show how our entire modern society actually functions. That being said, I’d probably give the edge to Wire if I had to pick one.

I mean, you could easily put the Sopranos in the same conversation as those legendary mob classics—think The Godfather, Elvis Presley, or Once Upon a Time in America...
The Sopranos doesn't miss a single beat when compared to those heavyweights.

James Garcia50 said:Nah, take another look.

Cellblock 211 isn't some police procedural; it's a prison movie.

Yeah, watch it again.
Aren't prison guards cops?

Zachary Nguyen2 said:Yeah, watch it again.
Aren't prison guards cops?

🤣 🙂
Sorry, but you’re totally reminding me of someone here, 🤣

But yeah, they definitely aren't.

And honestly, when it comes to prison stories, the shows usually run circles around the movies. Take Oz, for example. 🙏

Zachary Nguyen2 said:Yeah, watch it again.
Aren't prison guards cops?

They aren't, Zachary.

Nicholas Watson Asks:
🤣 🙂
Sorry, but you remind me of someone. 🤣

Of course they aren't.

When it comes to prison themes, the series wins again. Oz. 🙏

Again?

Oz is a 90s series. I saw some debate on previous threads claiming today's shows outshine movies, but that's nonsense. This current era of television isn't better than when we had Wire, The Sopranos, Deadwood, The Shield, Carnivale. It doesn't even touch the quality of the 90s.

Most people look at a five-year window using current shows. You mentioned Wire and The Sopranos, but those wrapped up ages ago—they belonged to a different era. Back then, those series weren't even better than movies, let alone today.

Whenever I see someone asking for lists like that, it tells me everything. It’s usually people who claim modern shows are superior while dismissing current movies without actually doing any research. They were clearly raised on Hollywood.

James Garcia50 listed all those film industries. These days, it's the Romanian New Wave calling the shots, while the Koreans have been dominating since last decade—honestly, all of Asia is on fire right now. The French have cooled off a bit, but Scandinavia is stepping up to fill the gap. What am I supposed to do, just tell someone they have to watch some obscure Romanian gem? [Link to IMDb: The Raid 2: Berandal] So, what’s the endgame here? Honestly, I doubt they'll even watch it. The second they claimed modern movies are bad, it was obvious they haven't done any actual research—they were just raised on special effects.

Second off, even if they do watch it, I doubt they'll change their minds. There are plenty of idiots like that these days. The variety is massive, but obviously, very few people who prefer today's era of television actually enjoy those kinds of dramas. They should just go watch something by Farhadia instead.

The internet is largely responsible for why people think this way. You can find practically anything online these days. But when it comes to TV shows, it’s mostly garbage. Millions of new series drop every year, and the vast majority of them are pure trash. I've already mentioned those mindless comedies or the pathetic attempts at procedurals.

What I’m loving right now is Rectify; House of Cards and Mad Men are still killing it. Most modern series just rely on manufactured hype. Even the 90s weren't better than movies, despite being stronger than what we have today—they weren't better because the films being made back then were simply superior.

TV series will never catch up to movies. Film quality is always superior. Take Oz, for example. Then you have Midnight Express, Escape from Alcatraz, and Cool Hand Luke. Three completely different prison films.

Some might bring up Green Mile or Shawshank. But Oz stands alone; there's just no comparison. As for Prison Break, it’s a joke. 😁

If someone tries to tell me today that Orange is the New Black is a "great" series, I’ll just roll my eyes. A truly great show is one that leaves you breathless with almost every episode. Aside from some likable characters and a bit of humor, Orange is the New Black doesn't offer anything that makes me say, "That's the one!"

It’s not just that one show. Nowadays, series are built entirely on cheap shock value, constant twists, and nothing but sex appeal. Everything is just overblown.

Nicholas Watson said:🤣 🙂
Sorry, but you’re totally reminding me of someone here, 🤣

But yeah, they definitely aren't.

And honestly, when it comes to prison stories, the shows usually run circles around the movies. Take Oz, for example. 🙏

Why not?

Zachary Nguyen2 said:Why not?

Where do you even live? In some small town in the Midwest?
Go ask a prison guard if they're cops.

bluenomad2 said:

Nicholas Watson Asks:
🤣 🙂
Sorry, but you remind me of someone. 🤣

Of course they aren't.

When it comes to prison themes, the series wins again. Oz. 🙏

Again?

Oz is a 90s series. I saw some debate on previous threads claiming today's shows outshine movies, but that's nonsense. This current era of television isn't better than when we had Wire, The Sopranos, Deadwood, The Shield, Carnivale. It doesn't even touch the quality of the 90s.

Most people look at a five-year window using current shows. You mentioned Wire and The Sopranos, but those wrapped up ages ago—they belonged to a different era. Back then, those series weren't even better than movies, let alone today.

Whenever I see someone asking for lists like that, it tells me everything. It’s usually people who claim modern shows are superior while dismissing current movies without actually doing any research. They were clearly raised on Hollywood.

James Garcia50 listed all those film industries. These days, it's the Romanian New Wave calling the shots, while the Koreans have been dominating since last decade—honestly, all of Asia is on fire right now. The French have cooled off a bit, but Scandinavia is stepping up to fill the gap. What am I supposed to do, just tell someone they have to watch some obscure Romanian gem? [Link to IMDb: The Raid 2: Berandal] So, what’s the endgame here? Honestly, I doubt they'll even watch it. The second they claimed modern movies are bad, it was obvious they haven't done any actual research—they were just raised on special effects.

Second off, even if they do watch it, I doubt they'll change their minds. There are plenty of idiots like that these days. The variety is massive, but obviously, very few people who prefer today's era of television actually enjoy those kinds of dramas. They should just go watch something by Farhadia instead.

The internet is largely responsible for why people think this way. You can find practically anything online these days. But when it comes to TV shows, it’s mostly garbage. Millions of new series drop every year, and the vast majority of them are pure trash. I've already mentioned those mindless comedies or the pathetic attempts at procedurals.

What I’m loving right now is Rectify; House of Cards and Mad Men are still killing it. Most modern series just rely on manufactured hype. Even the 90s weren't better than movies, despite being stronger than what we have today—they weren't better because the films being made back then were simply superior.

TV series will never catch up to movies. Film quality is always superior. Take Oz, for example. Then you have Midnight Express, Escape from Alcatraz, and Cool Hand Luke. Three completely different prison films.

Some might bring up Green Mile or Shawshank. But Oz stands alone; there's just no comparison. As for Prison Break, it’s a joke. 😁

If someone tries to tell me today that Orange is the New Black is a "great" series, I’ll just roll my eyes. A truly great show is one that leaves you breathless with almost every episode. Aside from some likable characters and a bit of humor, Orange is the New Black doesn't offer anything that makes me say, "That's the one!"

It’s not just that one show. Nowadays, series are built entirely on cheap shock value, constant twists, and nothing but sex appeal. Everything is just overblown.

Asians have been crushing it for the last 20 years.

It’s unfortunate that when you quoted me, I saw I had actually written "James Garcia50ga". My apologies, 😁

Sure, Asians are always in the mix, but they've really dominated the scene over the last decade, especially since Korea took the lead.

There was also mention of The Raid 2: Berandal, which honestly beats the first one. A massive action film.

I think both the movie and the series are solid... honestly, my shows haven't always been this intense—but ever since Oz showed up, and then things like Lost and Breaking Bad—well, let's just say I've started getting way more into series lately. And if there's a good movie out? You bet I'm watching it!

Through Tap

I need to check that out. 😁
By the way, I saw your avatar—have you seen the new Evil Dead yet?

I watched it, but without Campbell to make the movies actually work, and without Raimi bringing that fresh direction to the screen, it’s pretty forgettable. Same deal with the new Carrie. There's some talk about Raimi and Campbell working on a series http://www.denofgeek.com/tv/evil-dea...ell-to-feature

Maybe TV shows would finally outshine the movies then 😍

bluenomad2 said:It’s unfortunate that when you quoted me, I saw I had actually written "James Garcia50ga". My apologies, 😁

Sure, Asians are always in the mix, but they've really dominated the scene over the last decade, especially since Korea took the lead.

There was also mention of The Raid 2: Berandal, which honestly beats the first one. A massive action film.

Maybe Elite Squad and The Raid are the only movies where the sequel actually manages to outdo the first one.

This whole thread falls apart the second you look at the title. The term "everyone" isn't even defined, and the OP hasn't provided a shred of evidence to back up their claim.

The premise is imprecise. You should have said "most people," not "everyone." There isn't a single thing in this world that everyone can agree on.

Your sample size is way too small to draw these kinds of conclusions.
You can't just browse a couple of forums and websites and decide that the general public is "mostly satisfied" with series and dissatisfied with movies.
Movies and shows aren't judged en masse; every work stands on its own merit.

Your opinion and these arbitrary conclusions are just a drop in the bucket.
I stand by my view, and you stand by yours—the difference is you keep using the word "we" to justify your own perspective.

Making baseless claims about "universal acceptance" based on a handful of forum users doesn't constitute a global conclusion that "everyone prefers" series over movies.
In short, what you're writing isn't a "fact."

What exactly do you want me to provide? If there were a global survey with a billion participants, I’d give you the results.
All I can do is offer a sample, and then we can debate whether that sample is representative. You haven't offered anything to support your claim, whereas I've at least provided something.
My voice might be a drop in the ocean, and it might not matter since this is about quantity rather than quality.
Maybe my conclusions are arbitrary or my opinion is wrong, but at least I'm basing them on something. What are you basing your opinion on when you claim most people currently prefer movies over series?
The general consensus regarding the relationship between films and series is a factual reality. If you have a better way to determine this precisely, feel free to suggest it.

Many people (maybe including you) tend to equate "Hollywood" with "film," so they see all that Hollywood trash as film in a general sense.
Hollywood might have lost its luster (there's a separate thread on that), but films from France, Denmark, Belgium, Spain, Argentina, Japan, Taiwan, Thailand, and Korea are stronger than ever.

Hollywood churns out catastrophically bad movies—you watch fifteen minutes and you're already done—but those are the movies that get watched. They have the biggest budgets and, ultimately, the biggest impact on global box office success.
The rest of the world produces perfectly solid films, but they just can't pull in the massive audiences.
It isn't even a marketing issue; people simply aren't interested in the themes being explored, or the material isn't worth watching more than once.
To be honest, those are decent movies, but not masterpieces. It actually feels like people value them more than they deserve simply because Hollywood has nothing high-quality on its roster right now.
Maybe they'll become a major factor eventually, but for now, Hollywood is the main player and they set the rules.
I can talk about art all day, but without money, there is no art. Whoever provides the capital (Hollywood) dictates the art.

Audiences and critics don't always see eye to eye; when it comes to truly brilliant works, their opinions can drift as far apart as ships on the ocean. High viewership doesn't mean a thing. Look at an old American sitcom like *All in the Family*. It pulled massive numbers. Critics tore it apart, yet audiences celebrated it as one of the greatest shows ever. Where is the weight in those numbers?

They don't have to agree, but what happens if they do? Surely, that carries some weight that shouldn't be ignored or dismissed as irrelevant.
I've said it at least three times now: popularity alone isn't enough to judge a movie or a series. But if you have audience approval as the first condition, critical acclaim as the second, and high viewership as a third supporting factor, then you have a rock-solid foundation.

That show isn't even a series; it's just a collection of movies. They are comedies aimed exclusively at men. There’s no deep point or hidden message to debate here. It’s purely a matter of taste—do you like crude humor or not? The public likes it, the critics don't, which means it lacks universal appeal. Both sides have a valid argument.
If you were looking for me to validate your theory using an example, you should have brought up *The Sopranos*. That show hits all three conditions. The other example only meets two, and it's missing the most important one.
But why should I bother proving its importance? What's the point? I already stated that judging any single film or series ultimately comes down to personal taste.
We aren't here to debate the quality of one specific title; we are discussing the general attitude of the public toward films and series as a whole.

shadowangler50 said:

This whole thread falls apart the second you look at the title. The term "everyone" isn't even defined, and the OP hasn't provided a shred of evidence to back up their claim.

The premise is imprecise. You should have said "most people," not "everyone." There isn't a single thing in this world that everyone can agree on.

Your sample size is way too small to draw these kinds of conclusions.
You can't just browse a couple of forums and websites and decide that the general public is "mostly satisfied" with series and dissatisfied with movies.
Movies and shows aren't judged en masse; every work stands on its own merit.

Your opinion and these arbitrary conclusions are just a drop in the bucket.
I stand by my view, and you stand by yours—the difference is you keep using the word "we" to justify your own perspective.

Making baseless claims about "universal acceptance" based on a handful of forum users doesn't constitute a global conclusion that "everyone prefers" series over movies.
In short, what you're writing isn't a "fact."

What exactly do you want me to provide? If there were a global survey with a billion participants, I’d give you the results.
All I can do is offer a sample, and then we can debate whether that sample is representative. You haven't offered anything to support your claim, whereas I've at least provided something.
My voice might be a drop in the ocean, and it might not matter since this is about quantity rather than quality.
Maybe my conclusions are arbitrary or my opinion is wrong, but at least I'm basing them on something. What are you basing your opinion on when you claim most people currently prefer movies over series?
The general consensus regarding the relationship between films and series is a factual reality. If you have a better way to determine this precisely, feel free to suggest it.

Many people (maybe including you) tend to equate "Hollywood" with "film," so they see all that Hollywood trash as film in a general sense.
Hollywood might have lost its luster (there's a separate thread on that), but films from France, Denmark, Belgium, Spain, Argentina, Japan, Taiwan, Thailand, and Korea are stronger than ever.

Hollywood churns out catastrophically bad movies—you watch fifteen minutes and you're already done—but those are the movies that get watched. They have the biggest budgets and, ultimately, the biggest impact on global box office success.
The rest of the world produces perfectly solid films, but they just can't pull in the massive audiences.
It isn't even a marketing issue; people simply aren't interested in the themes being explored, or the material isn't worth watching more than once.
To be honest, those are decent movies, but not masterpieces. It actually feels like people value them more than they deserve simply because Hollywood has nothing high-quality on its roster right now.
Maybe they'll become a major factor eventually, but for now, Hollywood is the main player and they set the rules.
I can talk about art all day, but without money, there is no art. Whoever provides the capital (Hollywood) dictates the art.

Audiences and critics don't always see eye to eye; when it comes to truly brilliant works, their opinions can drift as far apart as ships on the ocean. High viewership doesn't mean a thing. Look at an old American sitcom like *All in the Family*. It pulled massive numbers. Critics tore it apart, yet audiences celebrated it as one of the greatest shows ever. Where is the weight in those numbers?

They don't have to agree, but what happens if they do? Surely, that carries some weight that shouldn't be ignored or dismissed as irrelevant.
I've said it at least three times now: popularity alone isn't enough to judge a movie or a series. But if you have audience approval as the first condition, critical acclaim as the second, and high viewership as a third supporting factor, then you have a rock-solid foundation.

That show isn't even a series; it's just a collection of movies. They are comedies aimed exclusively at men. There’s no deep point or hidden message to debate here. It’s purely a matter of taste—do you like crude humor or not? The public likes it, the critics don't, which means it lacks universal appeal. Both sides have a valid argument.
If you were looking for me to validate your theory using an example, you should have brought up *The Sopranos*. That show hits all three conditions. The other example only meets two, and it's missing the most important one.
But why should I bother proving its importance? What's the point? I already stated that judging any single film or series ultimately comes down to personal taste.
We aren't here to debate the quality of one specific title; we are discussing the general attitude of the public toward films and series as a whole.

I never actually said people... Most people? Not really. They really think movies are better than series? Is that what they're telling themselves now?
Doesn't exist. What's the general consensus?In art, you can't just generalize everything. Why even try?

shadowangler50 said:

This whole thread falls apart the second you look at the title. The term "everyone" isn't even defined, and the OP hasn't provided a shred of evidence to back up their claim.

The premise is imprecise. You should have said "most people," not "everyone." There isn't a single thing in this world that everyone can agree on.

Your sample size is way too small to draw these kinds of conclusions.
You can't just browse a couple of forums and websites and decide that the general public is "mostly satisfied" with series and dissatisfied with movies.
Movies and shows aren't judged en masse; every work stands on its own merit.

Your opinion and these arbitrary conclusions are just a drop in the bucket.
I stand by my view, and you stand by yours—the difference is you keep using the word "we" to justify your own perspective.

Making baseless claims about "universal acceptance" based on a handful of forum users doesn't constitute a global conclusion that "everyone prefers" series over movies.
In short, what you're writing isn't a "fact."

What exactly do you want me to provide? If there were a global survey with a billion participants, I’d give you the results.
All I can do is offer a sample, and then we can debate whether that sample is representative. You haven't offered anything to support your claim, whereas I've at least provided something.
My voice might be a drop in the ocean, and it might not matter since this is about quantity rather than quality.
Maybe my conclusions are arbitrary or my opinion is wrong, but at least I'm basing them on something. What are you basing your opinion on when you claim most people currently prefer movies over series?
The general consensus regarding the relationship between films and series is a factual reality. If you have a better way to determine this precisely, feel free to suggest it.

Many people (maybe including you) tend to equate "Hollywood" with "film," so they see all that Hollywood trash as film in a general sense.
Hollywood might have lost its luster (there's a separate thread on that), but films from France, Denmark, Belgium, Spain, Argentina, Japan, Taiwan, Thailand, and Korea are stronger than ever.

Hollywood churns out catastrophically bad movies—you watch fifteen minutes and you're already done—but those are the movies that get watched. They have the biggest budgets and, ultimately, the biggest impact on global box office success.
The rest of the world produces perfectly solid films, but they just can't pull in the massive audiences.
It isn't even a marketing issue; people simply aren't interested in the themes being explored, or the material isn't worth watching more than once.
To be honest, those are decent movies, but not masterpieces. It actually feels like people value them more than they deserve simply because Hollywood has nothing high-quality on its roster right now.
Maybe they'll become a major factor eventually, but for now, Hollywood is the main player and they set the rules.
I can talk about art all day, but without money, there is no art. Whoever provides the capital (Hollywood) dictates the art.

Audiences and critics don't always see eye to eye; when it comes to truly brilliant works, their opinions can drift as far apart as ships on the ocean. High viewership doesn't mean a thing. Look at an old American sitcom like *All in the Family*. It pulled massive numbers. Critics tore it apart, yet audiences celebrated it as one of the greatest shows ever. Where is the weight in those numbers?

They don't have to agree, but what happens if they do? Surely, that carries some weight that shouldn't be ignored or dismissed as irrelevant.
I've said it at least three times now: popularity alone isn't enough to judge a movie or a series. But if you have audience approval as the first condition, critical acclaim as the second, and high viewership as a third supporting factor, then you have a rock-solid foundation.

That show isn't even a series; it's just a collection of movies. They are comedies aimed exclusively at men. There’s no deep point or hidden message to debate here. It’s purely a matter of taste—do you like crude humor or not? The public likes it, the critics don't, which means it lacks universal appeal. Both sides have a valid argument.
If you were looking for me to validate your theory using an example, you should have brought up *The Sopranos*. That show hits all three conditions. The other example only meets two, and it's missing the most important one.
But why should I bother proving its importance? What's the point? I already stated that judging any single film or series ultimately comes down to personal taste.
We aren't here to debate the quality of one specific title; we are discussing the general attitude of the public toward films and series as a whole.

They don't.
How can garbage actually impact the success of global cinema? Trash is trash, no matter how many people watch it.

shadowangler50 said:

This whole thread falls apart the second you look at the title. The term "everyone" isn't even defined, and the OP hasn't provided a shred of evidence to back up their claim.

The premise is imprecise. You should have said "most people," not "everyone." There isn't a single thing in this world that everyone can agree on.

Your sample size is way too small to draw these kinds of conclusions.
You can't just browse a couple of forums and websites and decide that the general public is "mostly satisfied" with series and dissatisfied with movies.
Movies and shows aren't judged en masse; every work stands on its own merit.

Your opinion and these arbitrary conclusions are just a drop in the bucket.
I stand by my view, and you stand by yours—the difference is you keep using the word "we" to justify your own perspective.

Making baseless claims about "universal acceptance" based on a handful of forum users doesn't constitute a global conclusion that "everyone prefers" series over movies.
In short, what you're writing isn't a "fact."

What exactly do you want me to provide? If there were a global survey with a billion participants, I’d give you the results.
All I can do is offer a sample, and then we can debate whether that sample is representative. You haven't offered anything to support your claim, whereas I've at least provided something.
My voice might be a drop in the ocean, and it might not matter since this is about quantity rather than quality.
Maybe my conclusions are arbitrary or my opinion is wrong, but at least I'm basing them on something. What are you basing your opinion on when you claim most people currently prefer movies over series?
The general consensus regarding the relationship between films and series is a factual reality. If you have a better way to determine this precisely, feel free to suggest it.

Many people (maybe including you) tend to equate "Hollywood" with "film," so they see all that Hollywood trash as film in a general sense.
Hollywood might have lost its luster (there's a separate thread on that), but films from France, Denmark, Belgium, Spain, Argentina, Japan, Taiwan, Thailand, and Korea are stronger than ever.

Hollywood churns out catastrophically bad movies—you watch fifteen minutes and you're already done—but those are the movies that get watched. They have the biggest budgets and, ultimately, the biggest impact on global box office success.
The rest of the world produces perfectly solid films, but they just can't pull in the massive audiences.
It isn't even a marketing issue; people simply aren't interested in the themes being explored, or the material isn't worth watching more than once.
To be honest, those are decent movies, but not masterpieces. It actually feels like people value them more than they deserve simply because Hollywood has nothing high-quality on its roster right now.
Maybe they'll become a major factor eventually, but for now, Hollywood is the main player and they set the rules.
I can talk about art all day, but without money, there is no art. Whoever provides the capital (Hollywood) dictates the art.

Audiences and critics don't always see eye to eye; when it comes to truly brilliant works, their opinions can drift as far apart as ships on the ocean. High viewership doesn't mean a thing. Look at an old American sitcom like *All in the Family*. It pulled massive numbers. Critics tore it apart, yet audiences celebrated it as one of the greatest shows ever. Where is the weight in those numbers?

They don't have to agree, but what happens if they do? Surely, that carries some weight that shouldn't be ignored or dismissed as irrelevant.
I've said it at least three times now: popularity alone isn't enough to judge a movie or a series. But if you have audience approval as the first condition, critical acclaim as the second, and high viewership as a third supporting factor, then you have a rock-solid foundation.

That show isn't even a series; it's just a collection of movies. They are comedies aimed exclusively at men. There’s no deep point or hidden message to debate here. It’s purely a matter of taste—do you like crude humor or not? The public likes it, the critics don't, which means it lacks universal appeal. Both sides have a valid argument.
If you were looking for me to validate your theory using an example, you should have brought up *The Sopranos*. That show hits all three conditions. The other example only meets two, and it's missing the most important one.
But why should I bother proving its importance? What's the point? I already stated that judging any single film or series ultimately comes down to personal taste.
We aren't here to debate the quality of one specific title; we are discussing the general attitude of the public toward films and series as a whole.

shadowangler50,
We aren't even talking about movies or TV shows anymore; this is just a clash of worldviews. America, Asia, and South America aren't some "rest of the world," nor is that "rest of the world" just churning out "pretty decent" films that you've unilaterally dismissed as boring and uninteresting. Which people exactly are we talking about?

That "studio," shadowangler50, churns out absolute masterpieces, but let's be real—not every flick is for everyone. And people aren't just some mindless, monolithic blob controlled by a single brain trust in Hollywood like you seem to think.

So, you basically wrote off the entire global film industry just because it doesn't stack up to your favorite shows, all while using Hollywood as your only benchmark. You're basically bowing down to Hollywood like they're the ultimate gatekeepers of what "real art" even is. Is that really how we're measuring creativity now?

Luckily for us film buffs, nobody gets to decide what counts as art.

Asian cinema is absolutely killing it right now because they’ve basically become the mirror image of the US film industry.
They’ve totally embraced that Hollywood playbook. We're talking about people who are driven, sharp, and incredibly organized ☕

I'm trying to figure out what it actually means when people say two episodes of The X-Files were "directed in a Rashomon style." What exactly is this Rashomon directing style? Is it more like a crawl or a butterfly, and if it's a crawl, can anyone point out the specific difference between those two styles?

Patrick Martin said:edge of Tomorrow (2014)
So, I finally sat down and watched Guardians of the Galaxy (2014), and man, where do I even start? It’s one of those movies that just hits you differently, you know? Like, if you’re expecting some heavy, soul-crushing drama, you’re gonna be looking at the wrong screen. This thing is a total blast. It’s got this vibe—this cosmic, colorful, slightly chaotic energy—that reminds me of those old-school adventure flicks, but with a modern, punchy twist. It doesn't take itself too seriously, which honestly is such a relief. Everything feels fast, loud, and unapologetically fun. It’s like when you’re driving down a highway in a beat-up truck, blasting music way too loud, just letting the wind hit your face and not giving a damn about anything else. That’s the mood. The characters? They aren't your typical "perfect" heroes. They’re basically a bunch of misfits and losers who somehow ended up in the middle of all this galactic madness. And honestly? I love that. It feels more real than those shiny, perfect superheroes who always do the right thing just because they can. These guys are messy. They make mistakes. They’ve got baggage. It makes you actually care about them, even when they're being complete idiots. And don't even get me started on the soundtrack. It's practically its own character in the movie. It ties everything together perfectly, giving it this retro, groovy feel that keeps the momentum going. Anyway, I'm rambling. Long story short: if you haven't seen it yet, stop stalling and go watch it. It’s a riot. Just a pure, high-octane ride from start to finish.
Man, I was just sitting here thinking about Snowpiercer (2013) again. Honestly? It’s one of those movies that stays stuck in your brain like a splinter. You know the vibe—everything is falling apart, society is basically a pressure cooker, and everyone is just fighting over the scraps left by people at the top. It’s heavy stuff. It makes you wonder how much longer we can actually keep this whole system running before the engine finally blows. Just a thought.
Man, I was just sitting here thinking about *The Cabin in the Woods (2012)* and honestly? It’s still one of those movies that messes with your head long after the credits roll. Most horror flicks are just mindless jump scares designed to make you spill your popcorn, but this one actually had some guts. It takes all those tired, predictable tropes we see in every cheesy slasher and basically pulls the rug out from under you. It's like if someone took a standard Hollywood horror setup and decided to deconstruct the whole damn thing just to show us how ridiculous it all is. It makes you wonder about the "rules" of movies, you know? Like, why does the creepy guy always hang out in the basement? Why does the group of friends always split up at the worst possible moment? This film basically says, "Hey, we see what you're doing," and then turns the volume up to eleven. It’s clever, it’s dark, and it’s way smarter than the typical trash you find on a Friday night streaming binge. If you haven't seen it, you're missing out on a total trip.
Prometheus (2012)
Dawn of the Planet of the Apes (2014)
Look, I’ve been sitting here thinking about *The RAID 2 : Berandal* and man, my brain is just buzzing. It’s one of those movies that stays under your skin long after the credits roll. You know what I mean? Like when you watch something and you realize the pacing isn't just fast—it's relentless. It doesn't give you room to breathe, which is exactly what makes it so damn good. It reminds me of those high-octane thrillers where everything feels like it's spiraling out of control, almost like watching *Breaking bad* if they had replaced the drug deals with non-stop, bone-crunching martial arts. There's this gritty, suffocating atmosphere that just hits you right in the gut. It’s not some polished Hollywood blockbuster with shiny CGI; it’s raw, it’s sweaty, and it feels incredibly real. I was talking to casualtrucker3 about this the other day, and we were both saying how most modern action flicks feel hollow. They rely too much on quick cuts and loud noises to hide the fact that there's zero substance. But this? This has soul. It’s got that visceral energy that makes you want to jump up and start shadowboxing in your living room. It’s intense, it’s messy, and honestly, it’s probably one of the best things I've seen in a long time. Just pure, unadulterated adrenaline.
Død Snø 2 (2014)
Man, I was just sitting here thinking about *American Hustle*. You know, that whole vibe where everything feels like it's spinning out of control but everyone's still trying to look cool in a suit? It’s such a trip. It’s one of those movies that sticks in your brain because it’s less about the actual crime and more about how much of a chaotic mess humans are when they're trying to play pretend. It’s like... you think you have a plan, right? You think you’ve got the perfect setup, maybe some high-stakes scheme involving the FBI—I mean, we all know how those guys love to stir the pot—but then someone throws a wrench in the gears and suddenly everyone is just improvising. It reminds me of that feeling when you're driving down a highway in the middle of nowhere, thinking you're totally in control, and then boom, a massive storm hits and you're just white-knuckling the steering wheel. The characters are all beautifully broken. They aren't heroes, and they aren't even really villains; they're just people caught in this weird, desperate loop of trying to be someone they aren't. It’s heavy stuff, wrapped up in this flashy, fast-paced package. Honestly, it's a masterpiece of showing how much of a beautiful disaster life can actually be.
Under The skin (2013)
Man, I just finished watching Prisoners (2013) and honestly? My head is still spinning. It’s one of those movies that just sits in your gut like a heavy stone. You know that feeling when a film doesn't just tell a story, but actually makes you feel like you need to take a long walk just to clear your mind? That was this. It’s such a brutal, claustrophobic look at what happens when good people—people you actually root for—get pushed past their breaking point. It makes you wonder where you'd draw the line. Like, if someone you loved was taken, how much of your own humanity would you trade just to get them back? It’s dark, it’s messy, and it’s absolutely relentless. I kept thinking about how easily things can spiral out of control. One minute everything is normal, and the next, you're staring into an abyss. It reminds me of some of those gritty crime dramas you see on HBO, where there aren't really any "heroes," just people trying to survive their own worst impulses. If you've got the stomach for it, you have to see it, but seriously, don't expect to feel happy when the credits roll. It’s a heavy hitter.
Man, I just finished watching Enemy (2013) and my brain is basically a puddle on the floor right now. You ever watch something and feel like you need to sit in a dark room for three hours just to process what actually happened? That was this. It’s one of those movies that doesn't just tell a story; it kind of grabs you by the collar and shakes you until you're dizzy. It's heavy, man. Really heavy. It's got that weird, unsettling vibe where everything feels slightly off, like when you walk into a room and realize you forgot why you went in there, but instead of forgetting a grocery item, it's like your entire sense of reality is glitching out. It’s definitely not your typical popcorn flick. If you're looking for something light to watch while eating pizza, stay far away from this one unless you want to spend the rest of the night questioning every choice you've ever made. Total mind trip.
Look, I’ve been sitting here thinking about Pacific Rim (2013), and honestly? My brain is just kind of fried from trying to make sense of it all. It's one of those movies that hits you like a freight train—just pure, massive, heavy-metal chaos. You know that feeling when you see something so big on screen that you can practically feel the vibration in your teeth? That was this movie for me. It’s got that scale, right? Like, we aren't talking about some little street brawl in Chicago or a petty heist gone wrong. We're talking about giant monsters tearing through cities while these massive robots try to hold the line. It’s loud, it’s messy, and yeah, maybe it’s a bit over-the-top, but sometimes you just want to turn your brain off and watch things explode. It reminds me of those old monster flicks my dad used to obsess over, just dialed up to eleven with a Hollywood budget. But man, the whole concept... it’s wild. It makes you wonder how much we actually rely on tech to save us when everything goes sideways. It's like if the government suddenly realized we were totally unprepared for a literal alien invasion and had to scramble to build something insane just to survive. It’s a lot to wrap your head around while you're just trying to enjoy the spectacle. Anyway, I could go on, but I'm mostly just rambling now. Just one of those films that sticks in your ribs.
Man, I was just sitting there thinking about *Rush* (2013), and honestly? It hits different when you really sit with it. It’s not just some flashy movie about fast cars and engines screaming at redline; it’s about that absolute, obsessive madness that drives people to push themselves way past the breaking point. It reminds me of those guys who can't just play a game—they have to own it, consume it, and basically burn their entire lives down just to be the best for five minutes. You see it in all those high-stakes industries here in the States, too. Whether it's Wall Street sharks or tech geniuses in Silicon Valley acting like they're gods, that specific brand of "win or die" energy is everywhere. It’s beautiful, sure, but it’s also kind of terrifying how much someone is willing to sacrifice just to stand on top of a podium. It makes you wonder if the glory is actually worth the wreckage left behind.
Honestly, I was sitting there thinking about how much of a trip *Gravity (2013)* really is. It’s one of those movies that just sticks in your throat, you know? Like, you're watching this intense, claustrophobic struggle for survival up there in the void, and it hits you how fragile everything actually feels. It’s like being stuck in a broken elevator in downtown Chicago, but instead of just waiting for the repairman, you're staring into the infinite nothingness of space. Total nightmare fuel. Just pure, unadultered tension from start to finish.
So I finally sat down and watched Oblivion (2013), and man, where do I even start? It’s one of those movies that looks absolutely stunning—like, every single frame is basically a high-end wallpaper you'd find at Best Buy—but then you actually have to deal with the plot. It’s got that sleek, polished sci-fi vibe, almost like if someone took a high-budget Apple commercial and dropped it into a post-apocalyptic wasteland. The visuals are top-tier, no doubt about it. But once you get past the shiny tech and the gorgeous scenery, things get... complicated. It’s one of those stories that tries to be deep and twisty, similar to how you feel when you're trying to follow a complex legal thriller on USA Network, only to realize halfway through that you missed a huge clue. I found myself getting a bit lost in the philosophical weeds. Is it a masterpiece of existential dread? Or just a really pretty way to waste two hours? Honestly, it's somewhere in the middle. It’s got those big, sweeping ideas about humanity and survival, but sometimes it feels like it's leaning a bit too hard on its own aesthetic. It's like eating a gourmet meal that's plated perfectly, but the seasoning is just slightly off. You're left wondering if you actually enjoyed it or if you were just distracted by how good it looked. Still, worth a watch if you want to zone out to some killer cinematography.
Captain Phillips (2013)
So, I finally sat down to watch Oz the Great and Powerful (2013), and man... where do I even start? It’s one of those movies that just leaves you scratching your head, wondering if the director was actually awake during filming or just vibing on something else entirely. It's got that whole colorful, whimsical aesthetic going on—you know, the kind of thing that looks great in a trailer but feels like a sugar crash once you're twenty minutes into the runtime. It tries so hard to be this grand, sweeping epic, but it feels more like a high-budget fever dream. It’s like when you try to cook a five-course meal at a fancy steakhouse but you accidentally swap the sea salt for powdered sugar. Everything looks pretty, sure, but the core just tastes... off. Don't get me wrong, the visuals aren't terrible, but they can't carry the weight of a story that feels like it's constantly tripping over its own feet. It’s just one of those cinematic experiences that makes you want to stare at a blank wall for a few minutes afterward just to recalibrate your brain. Definitely not my cup of tea.
mama ( 2013 )
Philomena (2013)
Blood Ties (2013)
Stoker (2013)
Fruitvale station (2013)
You ever watch *The Best Offer* (2013)? Man, talk about a gut punch. It’s one of those movies that just sits in your stomach like a heavy meal you shouldn't have eaten. You think you're watching this sophisticated, high-stakes game of cat and mouse involving art auctions and old money, but then everything just... unravels. It’s like when you think you’ve finally figured out the rhythm of a new job or a relationship, thinking you've got all the pieces of the puzzle laid out on the table, only to realize someone swapped half the pieces while you weren't looking. It’s messy. It’s frustrating. It makes you want to yell at the screen because you see the cracks forming before the main guy does, but he's too blinded by his own obsession to notice. Honestly, it's a total trip. If you haven't seen it, grab some popcorn and prepare to feel a little bit hollow afterward. Just my two cents.
Man, I just sat through Afflicted (2013), and honestly? My head is spinning. It’s one of those movies that really gets under your skin—not in a good way, but in that "I need to go sit in a dark room and rethink my life" kind of way. It’s a total trip. You start off thinking you’re watching some standard indie flick, maybe a little bit of a psychological thriller, and then suddenly the floor drops out from under you. It’s gritty, it’s raw, and it feels uncomfortably real. There’s this sense of dread that just builds and builds until you feel like you can't breathe. It reminds me a bit of how certain scenes in Stoker (2013) make you feel—that creeping realization that something is deeply, fundamentally wrong with the person standing right in front of you. The pacing is weird, too. It’s not like a big Hollywood blockbuster where everything explodes every ten minutes. No, this thing takes its time to twist the knife. It’s more like a slow burn that eventually turns into a forest fire. If you're looking for something light to watch while eating pizza on a Friday night, stay far away from this one. This isn't "popcorn movie" territory. This is "stare at the ceiling at 3 AM wondering if the world is actually this terrifying" territory. Still, I can't stop thinking about it. It’s messed up, yeah, but it’s effective. It sticks to you like glue. Just... be prepared to feel pretty uneasy when the credits roll.
...

I am familiar with all these films; I have seen some, and I fail to see how any of them qualify as masterpieces.

Jessica Morris6 said:For starters, you've got Kings of Summer 2013., World's end 2013. and Grand Budapest hotel 2014.

@Patrick Martin, half of those movies aren't even that great. Some are just okay, and some are straight-up bad.

Are these supposed to be children's movies? I am asking seriously.

James Garcia50 said:Kenneth, I’d give you a list, but Patrick Martin already posted one. Just pick something from there, throw in Blue Ruin and a few flicks from Asia, and you're set for now.

BTW, GoT isn't even that great.

Patrick's list is desperate. Of everything listed, Blue Ruin is the only one that seems to have any potential. Fine, at least you provided one title. Perhaps I will get lucky with another one, who knows. Though I doubt it.

James Garcia50 said:Kenneth, I’d give you a list, but Patrick Martin already posted one. Just pick something from there, throw in Blue Ruin and a few flicks from Asia, and you're set for now.

BTW, GoT isn't even that great.

It is.

Zachary Nguyen2 said:What kind of vibe are you looking for?
New stuff, classics, Asian, European, or American?

Newer American films.

Kenneth Johnson12 said:I am familiar with all these films; I have seen some, and I fail to see how any of them qualify as masterpieces.

Are these supposed to be children's movies? I am asking seriously.

Patrick's list is desperate. Of everything listed, Blue Ruin is the only one that seems to have any potential. Fine, at least you provided one title. Perhaps I will get lucky with another one, who knows. Though I doubt it.

It is.

Newer American films.

Not at all. They’re really just meant for people who have a soft spot for comedies...