"I said and you agreed with me and said, "when most horror films nowadays are boring, by the numbers, and don't take any chances." "
no, i did not.
"yes, you can release attack of the killer thumbs or anything you want to and it will be successful with the right script, the right actors, the right music, the right directing, the right tone, the right marketing. any movie can be successful if done right. "
you want me to take that seriously?
"also, rating movies isn't subjective, it's certifiable and provable. otherwise why would anyone care what a critic said about a movie, if the review and rating is just based on opinion? "
yes, it is. you might want to rate simply by your taste alone, but then why debate at all?
"exactly, the sound of music is only rated at 8.2 on here. 8.2??? it's a masterpiece that everyone agrees is one of the best films ever made, yet, it's only at 8.2, it should be at, at least 9.2. "
what does it matter? 8.2 says "exceptional", 9.2 says "exceptional". if it had gotten a 5 then i could see your point.
"The Prestige and American History X??? not very well deserved of their rating on here or their being on the top 250 films of all time list on here. if a movie like American History X should be rated the same or better than it, then it should be Primal Fear, and American History X should not be rated at 8.2 or higher. It should be at about 7.0. "
because you say so?
"yes there are a few stinkers in Nolan's filmography: The Prestige and Inception. "
you gotta be kidding me. you might not LIKE those films, but disregarding their quality is just ignorant.
"exactly, good, so you agree with me on L.A. Confidential being greatly overrated on here and not deserving of being on the top 250 of all time films list on here. I thought it was horrible and really boring. "
again, that's you taste, but nobody in their right mind can say that it's not a great movie.
"so, do you agree with me that Predator should be on this list? "
i agree that predator should have a great rating, whoch it has. what do you care if it is in some top 250 lists? so it is onbly top 500. does that make the rating less valuable?
"good finally we agree completely agree on a movie being ridiculously overrated on here. "
we don't.
"there are countless other films which should be rated a lot higher than they are on here. Like Liquid Sky, the princess bride, spaceballs, roller blade, Crowley, True Romance, The Terminator, National Lampoon's Christmas Vacation, Raising Arizona, The Last Boy Scout, The Evil Dead, all the Friday the 13th films, Hellraiser, Evil Dead 2, Martyrs, Salo, Cannibal Holocaust, A Serbian Film, etc. and just look at all the ridiculously overrated movies on here. movies like freakin' lock, stock, and two smoking barrels, Boondock Saints, etc. "
see above.
reply
share
lukejbarnett2002
8 years ago
you can say you didn't say that but you did. all you have to do is look at your post from Jan. 21, in it you said,
"while i agree, that is no matter of the recent times. that has always been this way. not only in the horror category, but in all categories. each and every month 60-100 movies get released which are absolutely and uterly worthless."
which was in response to me saying, "when most horror films nowadays are boring, by the numbers, and don't take any chances."
so yes you did say that.
so it was contradictory for you to say that just nowadays you can't make a movie like Piranha(2010)in a serious way because as you said it's already been done in every movie genre always.
yes, I do want you to take that seriously, as there are just as stupid of movies coming out in theaters nowadays. movies like fifty shades of black.
no, rating movies is not subjective. If I rate just based on my taste alone then that wouldn't be right because that would be based on opinion. you have to know that rating movies can be done in two different ways: 1. based on your opinion and 2. based on film reviewing and rating criteria which you learn from taking film appreciation and critique classes. it's a science. I'm not debating with you based on my movie tastes. I'm stating facts about these movies.
what does it matter, what does it matter that the sound of music is at only 8.2???!!! it matters a lot because it totally takes away the integrity and professionalism and legitimacy of this website. it makes it so where with just that one false rating this website is not trustable when you want to find out how good a movie is. 8.2 is a long way from 9.2. it's all relative because you take shaun of the dead, which is ridiculously overrated on here at about 8.5 and then you look at the sound of music at 8.2 and then you can see how wrong that the sound of music's rating is. and 1 rating point means a lot when there are 10 rating points. and you can't say that the sound of music isn't one of the top 250 movies of all time. that would be beyond stupid and ignorant.
about primal fear and American history x. No, not because I say so. what I said about those movies is based on fact. Like I said before, film critique is a science. it's factual and certifiable and provable. And the prestige is not that good of a movie at all. it's very forgettable. the only reason why it's rated so high on here and the only reason it's on the top 250 movies of all time list is because of all the Christopher Nolan fanboys rating is way too high.
about the prestige and inception: "you might not LIKE those films, but disregarding their quality is just ignorant." that is wrong. no one, no one talks about the prestige ok? if it was so good, then people would talk about it. inception was the most overrated and still the most overrated movie of all time. it's way too complicated and unenjoyably convoluted. and it has an arrogant feeling and attitude to it of we're smarter than you and if you can't figure it out then that's your problem and you are stupid, and it has this superiority feeling to it which is really disrespectful and dishonorable to all the audience.
about: "exactly, good, so you agree with me on L.A. Confidential being greatly overrated on here and not deserving of being on the top 250 of all time films list on here. I thought it was horrible and really boring. "
"again, that's you taste." again, you're wrong. saying that la confidential is horrible and really boring is not based on my taste. it's based on facts.
"but nobody in their right mind can say it's not a great movie." that is just your opinion. so, it's not a fact and it's not correct because la confidential is not a great movie.
"so, do you agree with me that Predator should be on this list? "
i agree that predator should have a great rating, whoch it has. what do you care if it is in some top 250 lists? so it is onbly top 500. does that make the rating less valuable?
it doesn't have a great enough rating, it's only at about 7.0. it should be at, at least 8.0. and it's especially annoying and horrible and wrong in relation to Die Hard being on the top 250 movie list and Predator not. and it's especially annoying and horrible and wrong that Predator has a much lower rating than Die Hard. uh, yeah obviously it being in just the top 500 makes it less valuable of a rating because it's rating dictates where it lies in a top 500 movie of all time list.
"good finally we agree completely agree on a movie being ridiculously overrated on here. "
"we don't." yes, we do. I was talking about the teenage mutant ninja turtles remake.
reply
share
therefdotcom
8 years ago
as i said, "not only in the horror category", which is not the same thing.
piranha and similar movies can not be accepted in a 100% serious manner, because people while still stupid a) could not take it serious and b) are over the "killer bess", "killer worms" ..etc era, just as they are over the flight catastrophy genre.
but you are forcing to repeat myself, which is tiring and boring.
so i'll keep it short.
yes, rating should not be irrational, but yours clearly is. id one does like a film, does not matter in regards to the judgement iof the film is a good film.
also, your obession with ratings is more than odd. it does not matter, if a film is 8.1 or 9.2 or even 7.1. this site has a community + critics base rating system. it's not a scientific approach. that's why the imdb rating might differ drasticly from metacritics and RT. nevertheless, it is a silly approach to say that a film that is rated around 7, deserves around 8, because most people trasnlate the rating anyway into e.g. crap, mediocre, good, great and exceptional. some might use more attributes and some might less. in my case it is 1-4, 5-6, 7-8, 9-10. someone else might disect the ratings differently. but obession over .5 or 1 point? ridiculous.
"no one, no one talks about the prestige ok? if it was so good, then people would talk about it."
soo, by that logic all newer films are better than all older films. people talked a lot about the counselor .. mostly badly, but according to your definition it is vastly underrated. nonsense.
"nception was the most overrated and still the most overrated movie of all time. it's way too complicated and unenjoyably convoluted."
yeah, to YOU. again, completely taste related.
etc etc etc
thanks in advance for simply repating yourself in what you would most likely consider as your next "reply". ;)
reply
share
lukejbarnett2002
8 years ago
you said, "while i agree, that is no matter of the recent times. that has always been this way. not only in the horror category, but in all categories. each and every month 60-100 movies get released which are absolutely and uterly worthless." so you did say, "all movies have always been the same"
which was in response to me saying, "when most horror films nowadays are boring, by the numbers, and don't take any chances."
you said, "as i said, "not only in the horror category but in all categories," "which is not the same thing." but actually it is the same thing as saying "all movies have always been the same," because not only in the horror category but in all categories means, not just horror movies but all movies.
fuc# you.
you said, "piranha and similar movies can not be accepted in a 100% serious manner, because people while still stupid a) could not take it serious and b) are over the "killer bess", "killer worms" ..etc era, just as they are over the flight catastrophy genre."
You're wrong about those two things because, and you proved yourself wrong by stating this, all movies have always been the same which means that the same killer worms or killer piranha horror movies that were made in a serious way that were made in the '50s didn't stop people from making serious horror movies of the same kind in the '80s. just like how the same killer worms and killer piranha horror movies that were made in a serious way in the '80s didn't stop people from making serious horror movies of the same kind nowadays or in the future.
how would people get to the point where they are over the killer bees killer worms type of horror movie done in a serious way?
and why would people not be able to take a serious Piranha movies nowadays?
and if they are really over this kind of movie then how come they still make serious, slasher movies nowadays?
movie ratings should not be irrational but yours clearly is and that's a problem. you for some reason think that inception is a great film and so is the prestige but you are wrong about both of those things. those movies are just ok, but inception is extremely overrated, in fact I would go as far to say it's the most overrated movie ever made. and the prestige, is well, invisible to people, that's how average of a movie it is, and that's why no one knows about it.
yes, it does matter if a film has a 9.2 or an 8.2 or a 7.0 rating on here because I care about this website. but this website has let me down so many times by unfairly rating films on here, way too low or way too high. which proves that this website is a joke and is not a professional website. I used to think it was because I thought that the people in the entertainment industry use it and such. the ratings of a film matter even if it's 1 point because when you compare the rating for a film to another film's rating, the ratings really show their inefficiency and then those film's ratings are not right comparatively. and that's exactly what's wrong with this website, people like you who rate movies not precisely and generally and non thoughtfully. you should be exact with your ratings. one of the reasons why movies on here are rated incorrectly is because people like you give a rating that is just within a range.
you stupidly, ignorantly, and idiotically completely misunderstood my obvious point about the prestige. what I meant was if people didn't talk about it a lot in a good way then it's not that good of a movie. and to say that by my logic that all newer films are better than all older films doesn't make sense, as it's a completely different idea and thing, so it doesn't work as a parallel to my point. it's irrelevant to my point. older films don't get talked about as much as newer films for a different reason than they are not as good as newer films, it's that they are older than newer films, so people have already talked about them after seeing them. also, they have to move on to newer films and then talk about newer films because that's what everyone is watching and talking about after they watch them, newer films because that's what most people watch, they watch newer films.
"Inception was the most overrated and still the most overrated movie of all time. it's way too complicated and unenjoyably convoluted."
"yeah, to YOU. again, completely taste related." yeah, again you are wrong because Inception was the most overrated and still the most overrated movie of all time. And it's also way too complicated and unenjoyably convoluted. all these things are facts and are not opinions.
thanks in advance for simply repeating yourself in what you would most likely consider as your next "reply". ;)
reply
share