|
|
Post by coldenhaulfield on Jul 19, 2017 1:44:15 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by brownstones on Jul 19, 2017 1:47:37 GMT
oh right.......don't......................... |
|
|
|
Post by coldenhaulfield on Jul 19, 2017 1:50:37 GMT
oh right.......don't......................... There it is. Cool deal. Well, alright, dude. If you insist, I won't! |
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Jul 19, 2017 1:59:35 GMT
Seeing it happen enough times with other movies. Experience. So basically: a (presumptive and biased) "hunch" that you can't substantiate in any way. Take away Logan dying at the end and have Jackman say he'd be happy to keep playing Logan, the movie gets a score in the 60s or 70s at most. |
|
|
|
Post by coldenhaulfield on Jul 19, 2017 2:09:03 GMT
So basically: a (presumptive and biased) "hunch" that you can't substantiate in any way. Take away Logan dying at the end and have Jackman say he'd be happy to keep playing Logan, the movie gets a score in the 60s or 70s at most. You can't substantiate that either. And even if you somehow could it doesn't matter because that's not the movie they made. Why can't it just be a good movie? That was successful, critically and commercially? Not winning six Oscars or toppling Avatar financially, but doing "really well" overall. Shit, you have Origins to rip on, which is abysmal, and the other one to argue with people about -- the Japan one. Not me, so don't get any ideas. I thought it was boring and underwhelming and kind of a waste of everyone's time and money, including mine. But I think critics generally put it in exactly that 60s/70s range overall, so while there's a clear upward trend in quality you've got 2/3rds of a trilogy ("trilogy") that doesn't require these sorts of mental gymnastics and baseless speculations. And it therefore becomes easier -- /possible -- to debate your points because instead of arguing about your personal thoughts and feelings we're talking about concrete aspects of the movie or the business side of it. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 19, 2017 2:24:36 GMT
It needs to be said.  |
|
|
|
Post by coldenhaulfield on Jul 19, 2017 2:25:57 GMT
oh right.......don't......................... There it is. Cool deal. Well, alright, dude. If you insist, I won't! Wait, what am I not supposed to do again? |
|
|
|
Post by brownstones on Jul 19, 2017 3:30:01 GMT
Don't be like wormhole, or furiousstyle77, or dcfan.
|
|
|
|
Post by coldenhaulfield on Jul 19, 2017 4:15:40 GMT
Don't be like wormhole, or furiousstyle77, or dcfan. Me? Never. I'm only ever like myself. |
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Jul 19, 2017 10:32:34 GMT
Take away Logan dying at the end and have Jackman say he'd be happy to keep playing Logan, the movie gets a score in the 60s or 70s at most. You can't substantiate that either. And even if you somehow could it doesn't matter because that's not the movie they made. Why can't it just be a good movie? That was successful, critically and commercially? Not winning six Oscars or toppling Avatar financially, but doing "really well" overall. Shit, you have Origins to rip on, which is abysmal, and the other one to argue with people about -- the Japan one. Not me, so don't get any ideas. I thought it was boring and underwhelming and kind of a waste of everyone's time and money, including mine. But I think critics generally put it in exactly that 60s/70s range overall, so while there's a clear upward trend in quality you've got 2/3rds of a trilogy ("trilogy") that doesn't require these sorts of mental gymnastics and baseless speculations. And it therefore becomes easier -- /possible -- to debate your points because instead of arguing about your personal thoughts and feelings we're talking about concrete aspects of the movie or the business side of it. Struck a nerve, huh? And anyways, unless they plan on making every X-Men that follows the Swan Song of an Original Trilogy Actor and killing them at the end they won't be able to repeat Logan's success because all that movie was, was "One Time Usage" anyways. |
|
|
|
Post by charzhino on Jul 19, 2017 12:18:26 GMT
Struck a nerve, huh? And anyways, unless they plan on making every X-Men that follows the Swan Song of an Original Trilogy Actor and killing them at the end they won't be able to repeat Logan's success because all that movie was, was "One Time Usage" anyways. Wrong. Logan was well received because it was unique and well acted. First time a comic film has been set in an almost post-apocalyptic western style and it pulled it off flawlessly. It utilises the R rating to good effect without depending on it. It showcases Logans end journey in a very brutal and realistic manner, moreso than any comic character ever depicted. Many critics have said this could be Hugh Jackmans and Patrick Stewart's best performances ever in any movie they've done. You just dont like it because its grounded and Logan isnt in a bright yellow outfit doing the rainbow dance and making jokes to X23. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 19, 2017 13:00:37 GMT
Struck a nerve, huh? And anyways, unless they plan on making every X-Men that follows the Swan Song of an Original Trilogy Actor and killing them at the end they won't be able to repeat Logan's success because all that movie was, was "One Time Usage" anyways. Wrong. Logan was well received because it was unique and well acted. First time a comic film has been set in an almost post-apocalyptic western style and it pulled it off flawlessly. It utilises the R rating to good effect without depending on it. It showcases Logans end journey in a very brutal and realistic manner, moreso than any comic character ever depicted. Many critics have said this could be Hugh Jackmans and Patrick Stewart's best performances ever in any movie they've done. You just dont like it because its grounded and Logan isnt in a bright yellow outfit doing the rainbow dance and making jokes to X23. Logan was a cinematic triumph. The Marveltards want yellow spandex though. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 19, 2017 14:08:52 GMT
I watch all of the MCU films but only like about half of them. Iron Man 3, the Thors, Age of Ultron and Civil War were all disappointing. The audiences have been burnt by these films. Maybe they are starting to weary of them. It's Marvel's fault for dropping the ball. It started with Avengers 2 being pretty bad. They may have hurt Spider-Man: Homecoming's box office but it's unfortunate because it was good.
If you're a DCEU fan than don't get cocky. If Justice League is a success then Joss Whedon could be in control and he'll hurt the franchise more than anyone else can. He's so lame LOL.
|
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Jul 19, 2017 21:01:41 GMT
Struck a nerve, huh? And anyways, unless they plan on making every X-Men that follows the Swan Song of an Original Trilogy Actor and killing them at the end they won't be able to repeat Logan's success because all that movie was, was "One Time Usage" anyways. Wrong. Logan was well received because it was unique and well acted. First time a comic film has been set in an almost post-apocalyptic western style and it pulled it off flawlessly. It utilises the R rating to good effect without depending on it. It showcases Logans end journey in a very brutal and realistic manner, moreso than any comic character ever depicted. Many critics have said this could be Hugh Jackmans and Patrick Stewart's best performances ever in any movie they've done. You just dont like it because its grounded and Logan isnt in a bright yellow outfit doing the rainbow dance and making jokes to X23. There was nothing unique about Logan, except them killing everyone except the new character in the end. Other than that it's the same old X-Men story Singer has been repeating for 17 years done by someone else. I don't like "grounded" CBMs because they're a product of how ashamed moviemakers and audiences still are of comics. And if you think Logan's yellow outfit is the only one that could've been adapted you don't know X-Men. |
|
|
|
Post by coldenhaulfield on Jul 20, 2017 1:28:29 GMT
Wrong. Logan was well received because it was unique and well acted. First time a comic film has been set in an almost post-apocalyptic western style and it pulled it off flawlessly. It utilises the R rating to good effect without depending on it. It showcases Logans end journey in a very brutal and realistic manner, moreso than any comic character ever depicted. Many critics have said this could be Hugh Jackmans and Patrick Stewart's best performances ever in any movie they've done. You just dont like it because its grounded and Logan isnt in a bright yellow outfit doing the rainbow dance and making jokes to X23. There was nothing unique about Logan, except them killing everyone except the new character in the end. Other than that it's the same old X-Men story Singer has been repeating for 17 years done by someone else. I don't like "grounded" CBMs because they're a product of how ashamed moviemakers and audiences still are of comics. And if you think Logan's yellow outfit is the only one that could've been adapted you don't know X-Men. Now you're just falling back into schtick. "Grounded," "ashamed," etc.; this is all old hat, mang. |
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Jul 20, 2017 1:53:50 GMT
There was nothing unique about Logan, except them killing everyone except the new character in the end. Other than that it's the same old X-Men story Singer has been repeating for 17 years done by someone else. I don't like "grounded" CBMs because they're a product of how ashamed moviemakers and audiences still are of comics. And if you think Logan's yellow outfit is the only one that could've been adapted you don't know X-Men. Now you're just falling back into schtick. "Grounded," "ashamed," etc.; this is all old hat, mang. 2+2. |
|
