Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Badges

Powered by Vanilla
Welcome to Harry Potter Forum! Below you will find many interesting threads and discussions. Enjoy.

Martin1 · ✭✭✭✭✭

Alright I know there's gotta be some Legend of Korra fans here who are ready to squeal over tomorrow's finale

About

Username
Martin1
Joined
Visits
5,319
Last Active
Roles
Student
Points
5,542
Badges
31
Posts
7,788
  • Re: Disney Pixar's "Finding Dory"

    Okay wow it's legit? Damn.

    My reaction - ehhh. Be original Pixar, no sequel has been as good as their original. Toy Story 3 was my least favorite of the trilogy and Cars 2 was just poop. I love Finding Nemo but c'mon, this is just becoming pathetic.
  • Re: Kathryn Bigelow's "Zero Dark Thirty"

    I doubt there is any propaganda in the movie. Bigelow is a very careful director in those terms and already prove it with The Hurt Locker. :)
    It's a war film, there's going to be propaganda. The Hurt Locker had its fair share.

    Hurt Locker just seems to skim over the millions of innocent lives lost in Iraq and focuses on the "American heroes who died to defend their country and help make Iraq a safer place." Lol no, how about a million dead and many million refugees. How does the film look when it completely ignores those topics? What stance is it taking by knowing full well these are subjects of importance and skimming over them? Is the film saying "well we don't care about the civilian deaths or the completely unjustified and unconstitutional war"? Is there anything about these conflicts? It's more about the emotional response from American soldiers. That's fine, there's nothing wrong with that, but how about not skipping over important matters such as those! By skipping over them, it takes a stance as a pro-war film.

    The butcher scene makes the viewer feel for the Americans. It puts you in their mind thinking: "anyone here might kill me" as opposed to "let's find the bad guy and not kill civilians."

    The film is supposed to be anti-war, I mean, war is a drug right? Then why does the main character thrive for it? Why do the scenes fill you with excitement and adrenaline rather than horror and grief? He isn't scarred by the war, he's missing it! If that's not a pro-war part of the film I don't know what is. It's the usual "Americans are here for good reason to save lives kick butt and action packed adrenaline." Yeah, no.

    I'm not accusing Bigelow of purposely going "gee, I want to make a pro-war film!" Of course not, she's a good director. I'm accusing her of leaving out major components of the war that result in her film looking like a pro-war propaganda film.

    And let's not forget numerous servicemen talk about the sheer unrealistic events of the movie.

    Now I'm probably being biased - I am Iraqi and my family has been personal affected by this war to terrible degrees - so when I see a film like this that emphasizes the American war-action story and forgets the true horror and terrible facts behind the war many Americans ignore or do not know, well, it just pisses me the fuck off.
  • Re: The Great Gatsby

    Outside the annoying ass fuck trailer music, I can't fucking wait!

    Easily one of my favorite books of all time, so looking forward to it.
  • Re: Rate/Review the Last Movie or TV Show You Watched

    Like comparing Chamber of Secrets to The Dark Knight... I'm taking CoS Everytime.
    Like I said, movies with emotional investments make comparing over genres difficult especially. But it's totally doable, I don't see why you can't, lmfao, these "you can't compare anything" is dumb. I can't compare LOTR and Potter because they're two different kids of fantasy. Can't compare to Star Trek and Star Wars because they're different scifis. Loll, I'll compare them if I want to :p
  • Re: Rate/Review the Last Movie or TV Show You Watched

    Now I don't mean straight up 100% comparison, I mean comparison to a point. Like I said, you shouldn't compare some comedy to a drama and say the comedy was better because of humor, that I agree is a stupid comparison.

    What I'm saying is more like, you can compare movies of different genres after evaluating it in its own genre. Aka, rate Skyfall as a action-drama and rate Hobbit as a fantasy-epic. Now IMO I would say Skyfall is the better movie because I find far up action-drama list than The Hobbit, which to me was very good, but not where I'd place my top echelon of fantasy movies. My opinion.

    A lot of it is based on preference too. You can't fault someone who has a general bias for fantasy making this comparison. They'll enjoy The Hobbit more because it might be seen as one of the best fantasy films they've seen, whereas Skyfall might just be a regular ol' pretty good action flick. Now I agree that saying "oh well The Hobbit has this giant and detailed world that you can explore and Skyfall doesn't" is most certainly an unfair comparison, but it's a point of enjoyment for the viewer.

    But like I said, I feel comparison is fine when evaluating it in its own genre first. If you compare a comedy to a drama, take these random thoughts for the comedy for example: how did the movie balance serious scenes with comedic scenes, how funny was it, were characters given any depth or just used to gain a laugh, was the comedy more "lol FUCK ME IN DA ASS LOL IT'S FUNNY CUZ I SAID FUCK AND ASS" or was it well structured," etcetcetc and ask similar questions of the drama but in a different way: did the characters feel real or artificial, how was the plot handled and was it in a way that made sense and helped the overall story, etcetcetc blahblahblah the usually questions you'd ask. Once you have looked at it in its own genre, then I feel it's fair game to look across genres and be like "okay which left a better impression and was the overall better movie to me."

    Sometimes the difference is easy to tell. Me comparing Potter and The Hunger Games, I see Potter as one of the best fantasies around and The Hunger Games as a good, but slightly flaud dystopian/action-adventure. I'd then be like "we'll Potter characters better as fantasy goes and THG doesn't as much as dystopians go" (excluding my enormous bias to Potter for the moment) and I'd say "I see Potter characters better than THG characters," then extend that over all details of the movie.

    Now two movies that are excellent or about the same in terms in how much you like them just make it very difficult to compare across genres that it comes down to a point of preference. For example, How to Train Your Dragon and the Empire Strikes Back. This is especially difficult to me because one is my favorite animated film of all time and the other is my favorite scifi of all time. So when you have situations like these where you like two films at almost the same level, it comes down to personal opinions and personal preferences. In my personal preference ALONE, I like HTTYD just by the tiniest smidge more then ESB. And that difference is 100% personal to me. For some it's not even close, HTTYD is a good animated film but ESB the THE MOTHER FUCKIN BEST SCIFI EVER. And there you go :p

    So yeah, there are problems when comparing things across genre, but I think it's totally fair and doable TO A POINT, and that requires comparison in its own genre first and then a look around.

    Just my two cents :p