The Ultimate Movie Thread of Ultimate Destiny

FWIW I like Unbreakable and The Incredibles better than any superhero movie I've seen mentioned here lately (excluding The Avengers, which I haven't seen). I thought all the Spiderman movies were pretty bad, and the first two X-Men movies were pretty decent. But frankly, it's a genre I've had my fill of for the time being.
 
TorontRayne said:
5:
Hard to say. Do perfect movies exist?
Click to expand...

I don't know about perfect superhero movies, but there are definitely movies I'd rate a 5 (I prefer rating systems where the full scale is usable).

zegh8578 said:
5 is perfect: Horrid, Bad, Okay, Good, Excellent. Tells you what you need to know before seeing the movie for yourself.
Click to expand...

I prefer a nonlinear scale: Bad, Mediocre, Good, Very Good, Excellent. There's better reason to have a finer distinction between good movies than bad ones.

UniversalWolf said:
FWIW I like Unbreakable and The Incredibles better than any superhero movie I've seen mentioned here lately (excluding The Avengers, which I haven't seen).
Click to expand...

Unbreakable is a 4, my favourite Shyamalan (and much better than the super-hyped The Sixth Sense).
 
UniversalWolf said:
FWIW I like Unbreakable and The Incredibles better than any superhero movie I've seen mentioned here lately (excluding The Avengers, which I haven't seen). I thought all the Spiderman movies were pretty bad, and the first two X-Men movies were pretty decent. But frankly, it's a genre I've had my fill of for the time being.
Click to expand...

The Incredibles was awesome.
I couldn't give less of a shit about other superhero movies.
They are... so... unrealistic :'D :roll:
*kevlar*

@Per, it took me a few seconds to notice the difference between my and your example, but yes, and then 3-4 marks are even enough.
My point is 1-10 doesnt really make that much sense, how good is 4? is 6 bad? A cinemagoers main interest is to know if they're gonna waste their money or not, so in essence, it should be as close to "yes or no" as possible :D
 
I liked unbreakable a lot but think they kind of ruined it when they spelled it out.

they should have left it really ambiguous as to whether he had extraordinary powers or whether it was just his confidence and desire to make a difference that made him a 'superhero'.
that's really at the root of most superhero characters, but they layer on powers for the comics.

let the viewers decide for themselves and debate it.

incredibles was ok but kind of cookbook.

spidey 2 is still probably the best comic movie I can think of off the top of my head.
 
zegh8578 said:
Uhhh... Explain :I
Why is 1-9 better than 1-10?
Click to expand...

With even number scales there is no "average". Something can either be slightly above average or slightly below average with no in between, which is ludicrous. On a scale of 1-9 "5" would be the average movie, "6" would be slightly above average, and so on.

Does that mean you'd also approve of 1-11?
Click to expand...

Yes but that's kind of arbitrary and there's too many options on that scale. 1-9 is better. Explaining why you like a movie or why you don't like it is the best.


eom said:
spidey 2 is still probably the best comic movie I can think of off the top of my head.
Click to expand...

No it's only the best superhero movie. Ghost World is still probably the best comic movie.
 
Courier said:
zegh8578 said:
Uhhh... Explain :I
Why is 1-9 better than 1-10?
Click to expand...

With even number scales there is no "average". Something can either be slightly above average or slightly below average, which is ludicrous. On a scale of 1-9 "5" would be the average movie, "6" would be slightly above average, and so on.
Explaining why you like a movie or why you don't like it is the best.
Click to expand...

Obviously, but people are in such a hurry :0

And yeah, I was thinking about that too, but in reality it doesn't make much of a difference, since 4-6 are all considered "average", I doubt people think of it in strict mathematical terms.
Over here they often use little images of dices, to show wether a movie earned 1-6 dots, and I always regard 3 and 4 as "average".

That's why I prefer a much, much shorter scale, to really spell it out: Good/Bad, because that is primarily what they want to know.
If they want to know more than that, they can either read a more complete review, or watch the movie :I
 
I also approve of the "five stars" reviewing system since it's more or less the same thing as my 1-9 scale.
 
I saw this movie called never let me go which apparently came out a couple years ago.
I guess it's set in england in a kind of somewhat dystopian alternate reality -- although I don't know if 'dystopian' really applies here.

there's a subtle difference in this reality which they pitch right at the start, and kind of build off that wrinkle.
it's kind of a slow moving love story, and/or a story about people, so you nerds might not like it, but it has enough creepy alternate reality to hold your attention.

ps

well, I didn't see ghost world.
 
I liked Unbreakable a lot too. I was actually thinking about watching that today. Now I will.
 
So I saw The Dark Knight Rises. I thought it was good. Yes, I did notice some of the things that many people seem to be critical about but I found them to be fairly minor complaints overall that didn't really diminish my enjoyment of the movie.

That being said, I know that people look at these kinds of things very subjectively so there's nothing wrong if you thought that the criticisms severely impeded your enjoyment of the film. I personally thought they were minor.

Also,

[spoiler:1ea3ff68d5] I really liked how the character of Bruce Wayne got a happy ending overall. This character has been around for over 7 decades and there are lots of different valid interpretations but I was very pleased at the ending. I haven't read them but I have heard that the old Earth-Two Batman comics were similar as Bruce gets married to Selina and lives happily in retirement in them with a daughter called Helena...

Also, I liked how Batman basically succeeded in his goals throughout the trilogy. This interpretation of Batman becomes the character primarily to become a symbol and eradicate crime from Gotham. This has been accomplished and all of that...speaking of which, I liked how this felt like an actual trilogy. Even though Nolan said in interviews that they made each film as they went along without thinking too much of sequels, they still had references to the old ones...I think the only reason Talia was in this movie was to have a stonger connection to Batman Begins and resolve the League of Shadows plot point which wasn't completely resolved in the first movie...

My only real criticism is that I just wish that the 5 months of siege in Gothan had better time transitions shown to the audience...maybe they didn't do this to keep the suspense up but 20 days pass between Bruce escaping the pit and returning to Gothan but this time passing could have been shown more clearly...it does kinda seem that he just escapes and randomly arrives in Gotham...Anyway, this is just a fairly minor criticism...I liked the movie overall....

One final thing: I guess people who thought that Talia al ghul and Zzazz were their favorite villians might not like this trilogy as much lol...I was never a big fan of these characters and thought Talia was done ok in the 3rd movie but I still recognize that fans of these characters might dislike their potrayls....
[/spoiler:1ea3ff68d5]

Edit: One thing I forgot to say earlier,
[spoiler:1ea3ff68d5] Some people were talking about the "political" themes of the movie but I actually didn't see how people are making a big deal of these things. The League uses the economy to try and destroy Gotham's soul in Batman Begins, the League uses a variant of this through class warfare in this movie to try and accomplish the same thing. I'm not sure where people are seeing any commentary about Occupy Wallstreet or whatever, the movie was written before those protests and class warfare isn't some new theme...
[/spoiler:1ea3ff68d5]
 
Verd1234 said:
[spoiler:01b5552034] I really liked how the character of Bruce Wayne got a happy ending overall...[/spoiler:01b5552034]
Click to expand...

[spoiler:01b5552034]I actually disliked that. Wasn't he supposed to, like, blow up after carrying that nuclear device? I mean, come on. He would have been fried even if he managed to try and get away.

That said, it's possible that Alfred's vision coming true was just that - a dream. He might have expected to see him there, in his own reality. Seems more plausible to me.[/spoiler:01b5552034]

Verd1234 said:
[spoiler:01b5552034]My only real criticism is that I just wish that the 5 months of siege in Gothan had better time transitions shown to the audience...maybe they didn't do this to keep the suspense up...[/spoiler:01b5552034]
Click to expand...

That was one of the more weak points of the movie for me. Nobody did anything to try and combat the situation, not even the cops.

[spoiler:01b5552034]I actually thought they would have that pal Blake/Robin do all of the job. I just didn't expect Batman to come back and destroy everyone as if he never went through injury.[/spoiler:01b5552034]
 
Sub-Human said:
[spoiler:8cf7128c7d]I actually disliked that. Wasn't he supposed to, like, blow up after carrying that nuclear device? I mean, come on. He would have been fried even if he managed to try and get away.

That said, it's possible that Alfred's vision coming true was just that - a dream. He might have expected to see him there, in his own reality. Seems more plausible to me.[/spoiler:8cf7128c7d]
Click to expand...

[spoiler:8cf7128c7d]Bruce fixed the autopilot on the plane thing without telling anyone. He jumped out sometime before the bomb went off and the plane just flew out over the bay on its own.

Basically he killed off "The Batman" to give Gotham a faceless martyr that could accomplish what Harvey Dent never could.[/spoiler:8cf7128c7d]
 
Joelzania said:
Whatever actually happened to Bane at the end, may I ask?
Click to expand...

[spoiler:1bf85bd8fe]Catwoman killed him with the Batpod's gun.[/spoiler:1bf85bd8fe]
 
Courier said:
Joelzania said:
Whatever actually happened to Bane at the end, may I ask?
Click to expand...

[spoiler:41c7836c14]Catwoman killed him with the Batpod's gun.[/spoiler:41c7836c14]
Click to expand...

[spoiler:41c7836c14]Actually, I think it's supposed to be a bit ambiguous, we just see him get knocked off into the wall. But of course the same weapon knocked down one of the Tumblers[/spoiler:41c7836c14]
 
Here's my main problem with the film

[spoiler:a964edfbf9]Did Bane's revolt trigger a populist uprising, or was it merely a hostile takeover? I think we're lead to believe different things throughout the movie, but we never see the population, or segments, do much of anything.

Besides the prisoners, did anyone take up arms with Bane? Fight against him (besides the police)? I think they wanted to make the idea of a populist revolt pretty central to the movie but failed pretty hard in this. Anyone have insight on this, am I missing something?[/spoiler:a964edfbf9]
 
Guiltyofbeingtrite said:
[spoiler:69526b0369]Actually, I think it's supposed to be a bit ambiguous, we just see him get knocked off into the wall. But of course the same weapon knocked down one of the Tumblers[/spoiler:69526b0369]
Click to expand...

[spoiler:69526b0369]No it's not supposed to be ambiguous at all. Catwoman even spouts out some one liner about how, unlike Batman, she doesn't have anything against using guns to kill people.

It was supposed to be a criticism of sorts of Batman's methods. He could get things done a lot easier if he was willing to kill like Catwoman.[/spoiler:69526b0369]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top