Controversial opinions about other movies

1252628303160

Comments

  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,205
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    Just kidding

    denzel-relieved.gif?w=366

  • I always think of how different that 1st Superman film would’ve been if they’d actually gotten somebody like Warren Beatty, or Robert Redford for the role, both of whom were top contenders. I think both Beatty and Redford are amazing actors, but they wouldn’t have been able to do what Christoper Reeve did with the role. That man was born to play Superman.
    Controversial opinions on films...

    I think Superman (1978) is the best Comic Book film/adaptation...Love that film.

    Seeing it at the cinema at around 12 years old was quite an experience. I was in awe of the film, and at the time preferred it to Star Wars.

    The best superhero film ever made 👍

    I wish I could say I was in the generation of kids who saw it in the cinema, but I wasn’t born until ‘97.

    However, my first time watching the film as a kid will always stick with me. Some TV station (forget which one), was showing the Superman films for the following days after the unfortunate passing of Christopher Reeve. My first time viewing was just pure magic.
  • Posts: 15,105
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Controversial opinions on films...

    I think Superman (1978) is the best Comic Book film/adaptation...Love that film.

    I don't know if it's true, but while debatable, I don't think it's even remotely controversial. Now if you'd say something like the first X-Men movie, or Spider-Man, or Ang Lee's Hulk...

    I just think it’s the gold standard. Every comic book performance should be measured up against Christopher Reeve, and even then I’m hard pressed to think of performances better than that of Reeves as Superman. Yeah the film has aged quite a bit, but that doesn’t hold the film back or anything. It’s just a timeless classic.

    I could see how people would think of the first X-Men, or the first Spider-Man as the gold standard though. Those are pretty good films in and of themselves.

    I think Superman is pretty much the fold standard for superhero movies and maybe the only true superhero movie ever made. But while it is debatable, I don't think it is very controversial.
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    Controversial opinion:

    I feel SUPERMAN IV: THE QUEST FOR PEACE is the definitive Superman movie.
    A more chiseled and tough performance by Reeve, the ever reliable Gene Hackman returning as Lex Luthor, a tighter run-time and superb use of location substitutions. That industrial park made an amazing United Nations locale!

    Just kidding, the first, to me is still the best, but I do enjoy the lesser appreciated Reeve entries.

    Carry on......................

    Wasn't it the Milton Keynes train station that was used for the UN in Superman 4?
  • edited December 2020 Posts: 2,264
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Controversial opinions on films...

    I think Superman (1978) is the best Comic Book film/adaptation...Love that film.

    I don't know if it's true, but while debatable, I don't think it's even remotely controversial. Now if you'd say something like the first X-Men movie, or Spider-Man, or Ang Lee's Hulk...

    I just think it’s the gold standard. Every comic book performance should be measured up against Christopher Reeve, and even then I’m hard pressed to think of performances better than that of Reeves as Superman. Yeah the film has aged quite a bit, but that doesn’t hold the film back or anything. It’s just a timeless classic.

    I could see how people would think of the first X-Men, or the first Spider-Man as the gold standard though. Those are pretty good films in and of themselves.

    I think Superman is pretty much the fold standard for superhero movies and maybe the only true superhero movie ever made. But while it is debatable, I don't think it is very controversial.
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    Controversial opinion:

    I feel SUPERMAN IV: THE QUEST FOR PEACE is the definitive Superman movie.
    A more chiseled and tough performance by Reeve, the ever reliable Gene Hackman returning as Lex Luthor, a tighter run-time and superb use of location substitutions. That industrial park made an amazing United Nations locale!

    Just kidding, the first, to me is still the best, but I do enjoy the lesser appreciated Reeve entries.

    Carry on......................

    Wasn't it the Milton Keynes train station that was used for the UN in Superman 4?

    Maybe not controversial, but I think to a modern day audience they’d list something like Dark Knight, Spider-Man 2, Iron Man, or Logan instead of the ‘78 Superman. Those films are great, but I don’t think they match the quality of Superman ‘78, if anything Dark Knight comes the closest of the bunch, that’s another 10/10 superhero film for me.

    If you want controversial opinions, I like Richard Pryor in Superman 3...
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 4,603
    Superman 4 is enjoyable in a bad way... a few tweaks might have helped it be better. No Jon Cryer though, he’s annoying.
  • Posts: 16,148
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Controversial opinions on films...

    I think Superman (1978) is the best Comic Book film/adaptation...Love that film.

    I don't know if it's true, but while debatable, I don't think it's even remotely controversial. Now if you'd say something like the first X-Men movie, or Spider-Man, or Ang Lee's Hulk...

    I just think it’s the gold standard. Every comic book performance should be measured up against Christopher Reeve, and even then I’m hard pressed to think of performances better than that of Reeves as Superman. Yeah the film has aged quite a bit, but that doesn’t hold the film back or anything. It’s just a timeless classic.

    I could see how people would think of the first X-Men, or the first Spider-Man as the gold standard though. Those are pretty good films in and of themselves.

    I think Superman is pretty much the fold standard for superhero movies and maybe the only true superhero movie ever made. But while it is debatable, I don't think it is very controversial.
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    Controversial opinion:

    I feel SUPERMAN IV: THE QUEST FOR PEACE is the definitive Superman movie.
    A more chiseled and tough performance by Reeve, the ever reliable Gene Hackman returning as Lex Luthor, a tighter run-time and superb use of location substitutions. That industrial park made an amazing United Nations locale!

    Just kidding, the first, to me is still the best, but I do enjoy the lesser appreciated Reeve entries.

    Carry on......................

    Wasn't it the Milton Keynes train station that was used for the UN in Superman 4?

    I could be mistaken, but I always understood an industrial park was used for the UN exteriors. I'll have to do a little research.
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Controversial opinions on films...

    I think Superman (1978) is the best Comic Book film/adaptation...Love that film.

    I don't know if it's true, but while debatable, I don't think it's even remotely controversial. Now if you'd say something like the first X-Men movie, or Spider-Man, or Ang Lee's Hulk...

    I just think it’s the gold standard. Every comic book performance should be measured up against Christopher Reeve, and even then I’m hard pressed to think of performances better than that of Reeves as Superman. Yeah the film has aged quite a bit, but that doesn’t hold the film back or anything. It’s just a timeless classic.

    I could see how people would think of the first X-Men, or the first Spider-Man as the gold standard though. Those are pretty good films in and of themselves.

    I think Superman is pretty much the fold standard for superhero movies and maybe the only true superhero movie ever made. But while it is debatable, I don't think it is very controversial.
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    Controversial opinion:

    I feel SUPERMAN IV: THE QUEST FOR PEACE is the definitive Superman movie.
    A more chiseled and tough performance by Reeve, the ever reliable Gene Hackman returning as Lex Luthor, a tighter run-time and superb use of location substitutions. That industrial park made an amazing United Nations locale!

    Just kidding, the first, to me is still the best, but I do enjoy the lesser appreciated Reeve entries.

    Carry on......................

    Wasn't it the Milton Keynes train station that was used for the UN in Superman 4?

    Maybe not controversial, but I think to a modern day audience they’d list something like Dark Knight, Spider-Man 2, Iron Man, or Logan instead of the ‘78 Superman. Those films are great, but I don’t think they match the quality of Superman ‘78, if anything Dark Knight comes the closest of the bunch, that’s another 10/10 superhero film for me.

    If you want controversial opinions, I like Richard Pryor in Superman 3...

    I liked Richard Pryor as well. I enjoy the 3rd film and think Reeve looked his best.
    In this day and age there's so many superhero movies, several could probably be the gold standard. To my heart it's the first Reeve film, but a lot of that is nostalgia.
    Superhero films today have come quite a long way and get the respect and honor that didn't really happen for years.
  • ToTheRight wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Controversial opinions on films...

    I think Superman (1978) is the best Comic Book film/adaptation...Love that film.

    I don't know if it's true, but while debatable, I don't think it's even remotely controversial. Now if you'd say something like the first X-Men movie, or Spider-Man, or Ang Lee's Hulk...

    I just think it’s the gold standard. Every comic book performance should be measured up against Christopher Reeve, and even then I’m hard pressed to think of performances better than that of Reeves as Superman. Yeah the film has aged quite a bit, but that doesn’t hold the film back or anything. It’s just a timeless classic.

    I could see how people would think of the first X-Men, or the first Spider-Man as the gold standard though. Those are pretty good films in and of themselves.

    I think Superman is pretty much the fold standard for superhero movies and maybe the only true superhero movie ever made. But while it is debatable, I don't think it is very controversial.
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    Controversial opinion:

    I feel SUPERMAN IV: THE QUEST FOR PEACE is the definitive Superman movie.
    A more chiseled and tough performance by Reeve, the ever reliable Gene Hackman returning as Lex Luthor, a tighter run-time and superb use of location substitutions. That industrial park made an amazing United Nations locale!

    Just kidding, the first, to me is still the best, but I do enjoy the lesser appreciated Reeve entries.

    Carry on......................

    Wasn't it the Milton Keynes train station that was used for the UN in Superman 4?

    I could be mistaken, but I always understood an industrial park was used for the UN exteriors. I'll have to do a little research.
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Controversial opinions on films...

    I think Superman (1978) is the best Comic Book film/adaptation...Love that film.

    I don't know if it's true, but while debatable, I don't think it's even remotely controversial. Now if you'd say something like the first X-Men movie, or Spider-Man, or Ang Lee's Hulk...

    I just think it’s the gold standard. Every comic book performance should be measured up against Christopher Reeve, and even then I’m hard pressed to think of performances better than that of Reeves as Superman. Yeah the film has aged quite a bit, but that doesn’t hold the film back or anything. It’s just a timeless classic.

    I could see how people would think of the first X-Men, or the first Spider-Man as the gold standard though. Those are pretty good films in and of themselves.

    I think Superman is pretty much the fold standard for superhero movies and maybe the only true superhero movie ever made. But while it is debatable, I don't think it is very controversial.
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    Controversial opinion:

    I feel SUPERMAN IV: THE QUEST FOR PEACE is the definitive Superman movie.
    A more chiseled and tough performance by Reeve, the ever reliable Gene Hackman returning as Lex Luthor, a tighter run-time and superb use of location substitutions. That industrial park made an amazing United Nations locale!

    Just kidding, the first, to me is still the best, but I do enjoy the lesser appreciated Reeve entries.

    Carry on......................

    Wasn't it the Milton Keynes train station that was used for the UN in Superman 4?

    Maybe not controversial, but I think to a modern day audience they’d list something like Dark Knight, Spider-Man 2, Iron Man, or Logan instead of the ‘78 Superman. Those films are great, but I don’t think they match the quality of Superman ‘78, if anything Dark Knight comes the closest of the bunch, that’s another 10/10 superhero film for me.

    If you want controversial opinions, I like Richard Pryor in Superman 3...

    I liked Richard Pryor as well. I enjoy the 3rd film and think Reeve looked his best.
    In this day and age there's so many superhero movies, several could probably be the gold standard. To my heart it's the first Reeve film, but a lot of that is nostalgia.
    Superhero films today have come quite a long way and get the respect and honor that didn't really happen for years.

    I agree, I think a lot of the reason why Superhero films are so respected today is that they cross into many different genres of film. But at the same time, I feel like some superhero films nowadays (some, not all) tend to put more emphasis on world building and spectacle, more than heart and soul. I think Shazam has been the closest in years that has been able to recreate the magic of the original Superman.
  • Posts: 1,916
    I was also 12 when the original Superman came out and still remember that as one of the great cinematic experiences of my life. My uncle took me and my brother on a Sunday evening and the concession stand sold the program and even some kind of glowing Kryptonite rocks. Don't know what happened to those, but I still have the program. It was just a complete package of a film, exciting, great effects and a classic story and humor that was fun.

    What may have been part of the magic back then was that today epics are released all the time and back then they were fairly new. Star Wars and Close Encounters set the standard the year before and Superman was the next step that kept that style of filmmaking going.
  • Posts: 15,105
    The original Superman made you believe a man could fly. Modern superhero movies i feel don't bother with it, we just need to accept that there are superhero of various kinds and that the world is a comic book.
  • mattjoesmattjoes Julie T. and the M.G.'s
    Posts: 7,020
    Ludovico wrote: »
    I might have mentioned this one before: I prefer the French title of Die Hard, which is Piege de Crystal, which translated into English is Crystal Trap, to the original title. Oh and I prefer the novel to the movie.
    It's a cool title. Incidentally, they named it "Crystal Jungle" in Spain. Nice turn of phrase.

    Ludovico wrote: »
    The original Superman made you believe a man could fly. Modern superhero movies i feel don't bother with it, we just need to accept that there are superhero of various kinds and that the world is a comic book.
    What a terrific observation. A world in which this happens all the time is much less interesting to me than one in which this is a once-in-a-lifetime occurrence. It's the difference between an intrusion of fantasy into our commonplace reality, and an outright fantasy world.
  • ThunderballThunderball playing Chemin de Fer in a casino, downing Vespers
    Posts: 814
    Controversial opinions on films...

    I think Superman (1978) is the best Comic Book film/adaptation...Love that film.

    My favorite superhero film ever and in my top 20 favorite films list overall.
  • Posts: 16,148
    Has anyone here picked up the Blu-ray of SUPERMAN THE MOVIE that apparently included the ABC television extended cut?
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 4,603
    Controversial opinions on films...

    I think Superman (1978) is the best Comic Book film/adaptation...Love that film.

    My favorite superhero film ever and in my top 20 favorite films list overall.

    Same here! Along with The Incredibles.
  • Posts: 15,105
    mattjoes wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    I might have mentioned this one before: I prefer the French title of Die Hard, which is Piege de Crystal, which translated into English is Crystal Trap, to the original title. Oh and I prefer the novel to the movie.
    It's a cool title. Incidentally, they named it "Crystal Jungle" in Spain. Nice turn of phrase.

    Ludovico wrote: »
    The original Superman made you believe a man could fly. Modern superhero movies i feel don't bother with it, we just need to accept that there are superhero of various kinds and that the world is a comic book.
    What a terrific observation. A world in which this happens all the time is much less interesting to me than one in which this is a once-in-a-lifetime occurrence. It's the difference between an intrusion of fantasy into our commonplace reality, and an outright fantasy world.

    Not many superhero movies managed to make us believe in the premisse, I think. Apart from Superman, Nolan's first two Batman movies and maybe to a lesser extent the first two Raimi's Spider-Man did. I'm watching Spider-Man: Homecoming for the first time right now and while it's enjoyable I find it so... banal. Like nothing in it is out of the ordinary, even though the whole thing is ridiculously over the top.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 4,603
    Ludovico wrote: »
    mattjoes wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    I might have mentioned this one before: I prefer the French title of Die Hard, which is Piege de Crystal, which translated into English is Crystal Trap, to the original title. Oh and I prefer the novel to the movie.
    It's a cool title. Incidentally, they named it "Crystal Jungle" in Spain. Nice turn of phrase.

    Ludovico wrote: »
    The original Superman made you believe a man could fly. Modern superhero movies i feel don't bother with it, we just need to accept that there are superhero of various kinds and that the world is a comic book.
    What a terrific observation. A world in which this happens all the time is much less interesting to me than one in which this is a once-in-a-lifetime occurrence. It's the difference between an intrusion of fantasy into our commonplace reality, and an outright fantasy world.

    Not many superhero movies managed to make us believe in the premisse, I think. Apart from Superman, Nolan's first two Batman movies and maybe to a lesser extent the first two Raimi's Spider-Man did. I'm watching Spider-Man: Homecoming for the first time right now and while it's enjoyable I find it so... banal. Like nothing in it is out of the ordinary, even though the whole thing is ridiculously over the top.

    That’s Marvel Studios for you.
  • GoldenGunGoldenGun Per ora e per il momento che verrà
    Posts: 7,108
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    mattjoes wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    I might have mentioned this one before: I prefer the French title of Die Hard, which is Piege de Crystal, which translated into English is Crystal Trap, to the original title. Oh and I prefer the novel to the movie.
    It's a cool title. Incidentally, they named it "Crystal Jungle" in Spain. Nice turn of phrase.

    Ludovico wrote: »
    The original Superman made you believe a man could fly. Modern superhero movies i feel don't bother with it, we just need to accept that there are superhero of various kinds and that the world is a comic book.
    What a terrific observation. A world in which this happens all the time is much less interesting to me than one in which this is a once-in-a-lifetime occurrence. It's the difference between an intrusion of fantasy into our commonplace reality, and an outright fantasy world.

    Not many superhero movies managed to make us believe in the premisse, I think. Apart from Superman, Nolan's first two Batman movies and maybe to a lesser extent the first two Raimi's Spider-Man did. I'm watching Spider-Man: Homecoming for the first time right now and while it's enjoyable I find it so... banal. Like nothing in it is out of the ordinary, even though the whole thing is ridiculously over the top.

    That’s Marvel Studios for you.

    Exactly, nothing really stands out in these movies. Most of them are perfectly watchable, but 'banal' is the right word.
  • Posts: 15,105
    GoldenGun wrote: »
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    mattjoes wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    I might have mentioned this one before: I prefer the French title of Die Hard, which is Piege de Crystal, which translated into English is Crystal Trap, to the original title. Oh and I prefer the novel to the movie.
    It's a cool title. Incidentally, they named it "Crystal Jungle" in Spain. Nice turn of phrase.

    Ludovico wrote: »
    The original Superman made you believe a man could fly. Modern superhero movies i feel don't bother with it, we just need to accept that there are superhero of various kinds and that the world is a comic book.
    What a terrific observation. A world in which this happens all the time is much less interesting to me than one in which this is a once-in-a-lifetime occurrence. It's the difference between an intrusion of fantasy into our commonplace reality, and an outright fantasy world.

    Not many superhero movies managed to make us believe in the premisse, I think. Apart from Superman, Nolan's first two Batman movies and maybe to a lesser extent the first two Raimi's Spider-Man did. I'm watching Spider-Man: Homecoming for the first time right now and while it's enjoyable I find it so... banal. Like nothing in it is out of the ordinary, even though the whole thing is ridiculously over the top.

    That’s Marvel Studios for you.

    Exactly, nothing really stands out in these movies. Most of them are perfectly watchable, but 'banal' is the right word.

    I thought Michael Keaton was great in it as an everyman supervillain, but let's face it, it was one of the lamest turn into the darkside ever put on screen. Seriously, I'm not sure the Vulture would have existed had the government paid compensation for his trouble... or simply made him a subcontractor. And what he said about Stark is kind of true.
  • Posts: 1,394
    Man Of Steel is far and away the best Superman movie ever made.

    And i grew up watching the Reeve films.
  • Posts: 15,105
    Here's another one: The Bourne Supremacy miniseries is very flawed and has an awful TV feel to it, but I enjoy some of it more than the Damon films. I like how quieter it is compared to the movies, if that makes sense.
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    I thought Blade Runner 2049 was very boring, with bad editing. I know it's
    universally hailed as a masterpiece, but not for me.
  • Posts: 7,407
    I thought Blade Runner 2049 was very boring, with bad editing. I know it's
    universally hailed as a masterpiece, but not for me.

    I was expecting more, and came away very disappointed. It doesn't come anyway close to the original, imo.
  • Posts: 1,916
    I thought Blade Runner 2049 was very boring, with bad editing. I know it's
    universally hailed as a masterpiece, but not for me.
    I have it on Blu and have wanted to watch it but haven't yet. That said, I don't recall it being "universally hailed as a masterpiece" though. Your remark did cause me to check Rotten Tomatoes and I was very surprised to find it 88 percent fresh.

    But I don't recall a ton of discussion or praise from many quarters. It just kinda' seemed to be there and not a great sequel or addition to the genre or anything. Maybe I just didn't pay enough attention or didn't look at certain genre sites.
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    The "universally hailed as a masterpiece" comes from my experience, Everyone I've spoken to about it, all think it was fantastic and I must be crazy or not intellectual enough for it.
  • Posts: 631
    I’m a bit surprised at that RT score for BR 2049 too. My memory of its reception was largely “slow and soulless” and I can recall at least one review that said “pointless re-tread of Blade Runner about whether characters are humans or robots yawn” which is why I never went to see it in the cinema.

    Of course I then kicked myself when I watched it on blu-ray because it was so much better than the reviews I had read.

    And I discovered it wasn’t about whether characters are humans or robots or not, it’s about whether robots and software can become human. In philosophical terms the first film is about essentialism whereas the second film is about constructivism.

    But it is sooooooo slow-moving. The original rattles along. And in many ways it’s not as immersive as the original (the dystopian LA in the original feels like it is stuffed with real people, it really is magnificent).

    So I can understand why many viewers don’t like it. I like it overall but there are lots of bits that I really don’t like.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,157
    It surprises me too. I know I'm a biased fan, but I also remember practically empty theatres when the film opened here. The 88% astonishes me.
  • Posts: 15,105
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    It surprises me too. I know I'm a biased fan, but I also remember practically empty theatres when the film opened here. The 88% astonishes me.

    I haven't seen it but here's my hypothesis: the score on RT only reflects the overall reviews' score, not that it was a necessary sequel, as good or better or worse as the original, if it was faithful to it or if it's going to be popular. It's a sum of here and now impressions. Someone gives the movie a pass, it's one more fresh review on RT. Someone hails it as a masterpiece, it's also a fresh review.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,546
    I thought Blade Runner 2049 was very boring, with bad editing. I know it's
    universally hailed as a masterpiece, but not for me.

    To your point, I started watching it and really enjoyed the Batista fight, and then immediately fell asleep.

    Having said that I do really want to watch it properly at some point.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,205
    I loved BR2049 but it definitely could have lost twenty minutes or so in the edit. I find it very engrossing and immersive but it could have been a bit zippier and still left those qualities intact.

    Also, as far as theatre attendances go, the audience score is usually the one to look at; but in 2049's case it's at 81%, which is still quite high for a film that was a financial disappointment.
  • ThunderballThunderball playing Chemin de Fer in a casino, downing Vespers
    Posts: 814
    Man, I loved Blade Runner 2049. Very nearly as much as the original. I don’t mind slow-moving as long as I’m as invested as possible for all that time.
  • goldenswissroyalegoldenswissroyale Switzerland
    Posts: 4,473
    BR 2049: I was amazed for around an hour but somehow lost a bit of interest the longer it took. Good acting, wonderful colours, some interesting thoughts but not a film I will watch again.
Sign In or Register to comment.