|
Post by kingkoopa on Jul 10, 2017 0:07:17 GMT
"Temple of Doom" though I think the ultimate was "Last Crusade." Connery and Ford are excellent together.
I wanted to like "Crystal Skull." I didn't think it was that bad honestly (though I can't stand Shia LeBouf and some of the CGI was terrible). The time period was a good choice...seeing Indy dealing with notorious government cover-ups (top men), explaining the fact that he'd aged, getting a knock-out hot Cate Blanchett...it all should have worked, but it didn't for me. Best way I can think to describe it is that it seemed like a fanfic with a big enough kickstarter.
I admit, I may have liked it more had Shia LeBouf been there. Don't know what it is about that guy, but I sigh the minute I see him turn up in anything.
|
|
|
Post by Nalkarj on Jul 10, 2017 0:26:50 GMT
"...had Shia LeBeouf not been there," kingkoopa ? I'm with you on Mr. LeBeouf. I don't detect anything really bad with the performance or anything, but something about his acting just rubs me the wrong way. If I had to choose, I think I minded him in the least in Disturbia, but even there I liked the plot, borrowed wholesale from Rear Window, more than the rather cardboard characters.
|
|
|
Post by mslo79 on Jul 10, 2017 0:42:06 GMT
Crystal Skull
that's not as bad as many claim it is if you ask me.
p.s. I only like the 3rd/4th movies (i prefer 3rd over the 4th) as the first two simply don't hold up.
|
|
|
Post by MCDemuth on Jul 10, 2017 0:54:02 GMT
Crystal Skullthat's not as bad as many claim it is if you ask me. p.s. I only like the 3rd/4th movies (i prefer 3rd over the 4th) as the first two simply don't hold up. You don't like Raiders Of The Lost Ark? That's blasphemy! Seeing the bad guy's face melt by the Ark is the best thing in all of the movies.
|
|
|
Post by kingkoopa on Jul 10, 2017 0:54:12 GMT
"...had Shia LeBeouf not been there," kingkoopa ? I'm with you on Mr. LeBeouf. I don't detect anything really bad with the performance or anything, but something about his acting just rubs me the wrong way. If I had to choose, I think I minded him in the least in Disturbia, but even there I liked the plot, borrowed wholesale from Rear Window, more than the rather cardboard characters. Nice catch on the "not." That's what I meant to say. I don't dislike him in general, but he had the unfortunate task of having to out-badass Harrison Ford. I happen to like Pauly Shore, but I could never buy him as a tough guy. LeBeouf (oops again on the spelling, let me butcher another one...) reminds me of Jake Gylenhall in that I think he's going to be in some pictures I really like ("Disturbia" was great!), but I'll never buy him as a tough guy. More or less, I think age will be kind to LeBeouf similarly as how it was for Sean Penn. Gylenhall ("Life" and "Southpaw") has been impressing me lately. He wouldn't have fared much better trying to out-Ford Harrison Ford at that time. Shia's good enough to earn a few mulligans for me. He's quite good alongside Tom Hardy in 2012's "Lawless." He's been sold as this leading-man, tough-guy for a few of his bigger projects and I just can't buy it. I don't wish ill on anyone. He could pull a Matthew McCoughnahey in a few years and reinvent himself (without revinventing himself). I'd love to see it happen, as LeBeouf is an obviously talented guy. Thanks for the comments, I love talking about movies about as much as I love watching them.
|
|
|
Post by fartyfartsalot on Jul 10, 2017 3:25:42 GMT
Crystal Skullthat's not as bad as many claim it is if you ask me. p.s. I only like the 3rd/4th movies (i prefer 3rd over the 4th) as the first two simply don't hold up. You don't like Raiders Of The Lost Ark? That's blasphemy! Seeing the bad guy's face melt by the Ark is the best thing in all of the movies. He doesn't like a lot of things.
|
|
|
Post by mslo79 on Jul 10, 2017 5:10:50 GMT
MCDemuth That's correct. I don't care for it. it's not crap but at the end of the day it's not worth re-watching anymore. in fact, i re-watched all four movies back in Feb 2015 and only the 3rd/4th are worth re-watching for me at this point. prior to that Feb 2015 viewing it was many years since i last re-watched the series. fartyfartsalot In terms of a basic Thumbs Up vs Thumbs Down thing over the long term... only about 3 out of every 10 movies i see get a Thumbs Up. the rest... Thumbs Down. so while that looks like i dislike a lot of what i see it's not as bad as it looks because... i can say that most movies i see are decent enough not to have wasted my time it's just that movies i don't want to re-watch from time-to-time cannot get a Thumbs Up from me and that puts them apart of the Thumbs Down group of movies. i can't be the only person who thinks the vast majority of movies are nothing special and my ratings basically reflect this. to me... it makes no sense to praise a movie (or something along those lines) and then never care to see it again as to me truly good (or great) movies should stand the test of time and hold up on re-watches as the years pass. p.s. basically that's about 620 movies MAX out of the 2,150-ish total movies i have seen that got a Thumbs Up. which is actually a bit under 30% of every thing i have seen but it's basically close enough for me to claim that '3 out of 10 in the long term' thing.
|
|
|
Post by poelzig on Jul 10, 2017 5:35:33 GMT
You don't like Raiders Of The Lost Ark? That's blasphemy! Seeing the bad guy's face melt by the Ark is the best thing in all of the movies. He doesn't like a lot of things. That's an understatement. He has very odd tastes. He also seems to keep records of everything he watches including the day and time. Were you disappointed that Twin Peaks actually sort of kinda moved the plot forward tonight? Not a hobo zombie or cricket frog demon in sight.
|
|
|
Post by Nicko's Nose on Jul 10, 2017 7:18:22 GMT
Crystal Skull is pretty underrated, but Temple is much much better.
|
|
|
Post by fartyfartsalot on Jul 10, 2017 17:22:40 GMT
He doesn't like a lot of things. That's an understatement. He has very odd tastes. He also seems to keep records of everything he watches including the day and time. Were you disappointed that Twin Peaks actually sort of kinda moved the plot forward tonight? Not a hobo zombie or cricket frog demon in sight. Haha, that was definitely a better episode. But I'm still waiting for Coop to shake the retard state & go back to normal.
|
|
|
Post by sostie on Jul 10, 2017 17:27:57 GMT
Crystal Skull has many many faults...but I'd much rather watch it than even worse TOD
|
|
|
Post by marth on Jul 10, 2017 17:43:38 GMT
Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade
Crystal Skull
Temple of Doom
|
|
|
Post by poelzig on Jul 10, 2017 21:41:18 GMT
Why do Millennials blindly worship that goofball Shitty LeBoof?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2017 21:46:08 GMT
Temple of Doom by a long way. Crystal Skull sucked ass.
|
|
|
Post by Nalkarj on Jul 10, 2017 21:49:36 GMT
He doesn't like a lot of things. That's an understatement. He has very odd tastes. He also seems to keep records of everything he watches including the day and time. Were you disappointed that Twin Peaks actually sort of kinda moved the plot forward tonight? Not a hobo zombie or cricket frog demon in sight. OK, fellas. A few things. mslo79 and I disagree on this, admittedly. I just saw Raiders again the other day, and I still find it superb. It's a definite favorite, and I am also a great fan of Temple of Doom. Just because MSlovak's tastes differ from yours and mine, however, does not make them "odd." Or wrong, or anything. He just has different tastes, that's all, and--as they all say--we're entitled to our tastes and our opinions. It's fine that he doesn't like Raiders, or Temple, or anything--and it's fine that we do like them. De gustibus, guys.
|
|
|
Post by poelzig on Jul 10, 2017 22:21:51 GMT
That's an understatement. He has very odd tastes. He also seems to keep records of everything he watches including the day and time. Were you disappointed that Twin Peaks actually sort of kinda moved the plot forward tonight? Not a hobo zombie or cricket frog demon in sight. OK, fellas. A few things. mslo79 and I disagree on this, admittedly. I just saw Raiders again the other day, and I still find it superb. It's a definite favorite, and I am also a great fan of Temple of Doom. Just because MSlovak's tastes differ from yours and mine, however, does not make them "odd." Or wrong, or anything. He just has different tastes, that's all, and--as they all say--we're entitled to our tastes and our opinions. It's fine that he doesn't like Raiders, or Temple, or anything--and it's fine that we do like them. De gustibus, guys. Unique would have been a better way to phrase it. I have no problem with slovak at all. He is obviously a movie fan going by his documenting of what he watches and rating them all. I certainly don't do that. It just always surprises me that he usually rates beloved films rated highly by most a 6 or lower and conversely rates schlock much higher. Different tastes is what makes loving movies great though.
|
|
|
Post by Nalkarj on Jul 10, 2017 22:23:30 GMT
Unique would have been a better way to phrase it. I have no problem with slovak at all. He is obviously a movie fan going by his documenting of what he watches and rating them all. I certainly don't do that. It just always surprises me that he usually rates beloved films rated highly by most a 6 or lower and conversely rates schlock much higher. Different tastes is what makes loving movies great though. Thanks, Poelzing. On that we completely agree.
|
|
|
Post by drystyx on Jul 10, 2017 22:40:39 GMT
I can't believe something as stupid as Temple of Doom, obviously the worst of the series, is getting so many votes. The opening sequence is one of the ten worst opening sequences in movie history.
By default, Crystal Skull, which is at least fun. Can't say that about the tedious, uninspired Temple of Doom.
|
|
|
Post by mslo79 on Jul 11, 2017 3:43:57 GMT
poelzig With that wording it makes it look like i largely praise crap and dis all of the popular stuff etc, which is not true. look at My Favorite Movies... there are many that are at least moderately well known with some lesser known movies etc. but i don't think this would be that much different from other random people who come up with their favorite movies type of list. i think once someone is praising mostly obscure movies and dissing the vast majority of movies that are well known etc is when that persons taste in movies becomes TOO far away from everyone else's which would make that persons opinion of a movie of lesser value to a lot of people because of that. also, just looking at the fact that i have only given 196 movies a 7/10 or higher out of the 2,100+ total movies i have seen that means there is going to be plenty of movies i don't think all that highly of that many others do simply because it's pretty safe to say that there is more than 196 movies that the masses would probably consider quality or higher quality movies etc. Yep. as the years passed and you have seen many movies you can see what's of higher quality vs what is not and i rate accordingly. that's where i feel a good portion of IMDb users (i am just speculating here) are way too generous with their ratings because i am willing to bet, at least some of them, who give a movie a high score probably end up largely forgetting that movie and moving onto the next one not all that long after they have seen it which to me says that they don't really like it as much as their rating suggests. that's one area my rating system is pretty well tuned as i am not going to give a high rating to a movie ill see once or so and then never see it again as to me it don't make sense to praise those movies if they fail to hold strong on re-watches as the years pass as the truly great movies stand the test of time and hold up well on re-watches and those movies that fail to do that ill lower my score accordingly based on how much i enjoy it. so documenting them, at least on some level, is basically a good idea as you can sort out the gems from those 'just another movie' types. I would be willing to bet my tastes ain't all that much different from the masses. sure, they are not exactly the same but i would imagine on a individual person basis that's to be expected as if you started picking random people who have seen plenty of movies your probably not going to find someone with the same lists (say ask random people to come up with say a Top 200 list(or whatever they would consider good enough to be considered amongst their favorites(i.e. movies that stand out from the pack for them)) as even to find someone close would probably not be all that common i suspect. that's (i.e. not being too disconnected with the masses) the most important thing if you want to gauge your overall taste in movies as i would base it more around that standard than anything else because if your taste become too much different from the masses your opinion won't be worth all that much to the average person on movies. i know we all like what we all like, regardless of it's for or against the majority, but you get the idea with that said... it's just i tend to like a more narrow percentage of the movies i see to any higher degree is all. but i sorta see it as some people are probably too easily pleased as i would like to see if someone who's seen roughly the amount of movies i have seen (or more) still finds it easy to find higher quality movies that they have not already seen. for the record... i only log Month/Day/Year when i view a movie as that info helps me know how long it's been since i last viewed a movie as with that info it helps me keep track of when i last re-watched a movie i like on a higher level as a general rule i try to re-watch ALL movies i gave a 7 or higher at least once every few years or so etc. but i do log some other stuff in separate files for a while now like for movies i see this year ill have a file called '2017.txt' and log a bit of stuff but that's mainly just to keep track of what my favorites are in the given year and i got one listing all of my 6/10's and than another for 7's and higher etc.
|
|
|
Post by fartyfartsalot on Jul 11, 2017 6:48:18 GMT
OK, fellas. A few things. mslo79 and I disagree on this, admittedly. I just saw Raiders again the other day, and I still find it superb. It's a definite favorite, and I am also a great fan of Temple of Doom. Just because MSlovak's tastes differ from yours and mine, however, does not make them "odd." Or wrong, or anything. He just has different tastes, that's all, and--as they all say--we're entitled to our tastes and our opinions. It's fine that he doesn't like Raiders, or Temple, or anything--and it's fine that we do like them. De gustibus, guys. Unique would have been a better way to phrase it. I have no problem with slovak at all. He is obviously a movie fan going by his documenting of what he watches and rating them all. I certainly don't do that. It just always surprises me that he usually rates beloved films rated highly by most a 6 or lower and conversely rates schlock much higher. Different tastes is what makes loving movies great though. He gave Do the Right Thing, Amelie, Star Wars: A New Hope and City of God 2/10s.
|
|