A community about movies and cinema.
Related communities:
No posts or comments will be removed without an explanation from mods.
Well, popular is not the same as good. Is Taylor Swift the best singer and composer in the world? (definitely not)
I'm not saying the avatar movies are bad, but IMO there's lots wrong with them story wise. Impressive visuals alone don't make a film good.
It's like McDonalds vs a local restaurant. More people go to McDs, but I bet most local restaurants are way better.
The difference being that sadly people wouldn't pay more to watch small scale film like they do with restaurants.
Have you not been to McD's in a few years? McD's is the expensive option. People pay for familiarity, because they're dumb lazy slobs.
Depends what you mean by the expensive option...
chikfila's chicken sandwich is cheaper mcd's
The option that's more expensive than the other.
Sure, they're not priced like a Michelin Starred restaurant. Sure a few sitdown restaurants have also raised their prices (especially popular chains), but the comparison is McD's vs "another local burger joint". While Five Guys and Red Robin might not be cheaper than McD's, they're also not a local burger joint!
I'd also argue they're not trying to compete with McD's, while McD's is competing with them on price.
The term "best" is extremely vague. How does one define the "best" anything? There are countless possible options, some of which would absolutely put Taylor as the best. There are also many that wouldn't, some even putting her near the bottom.
Avatar was, and always has been, a movie about the visuals. It's total eye-candy, meant to wow audiences. And if that's how you define the "best" movie, it probably is.
But it's equally valid to define the best as being a total immersion, or drawing your emotions, or being convincing, or having an expansive story to tell. Especially on that last option, Avatar is pretty bad.
Siskel and Ebert were well-known for their movie reviews. Typically, one hated it and the other loved it, and for different reasons. Their goal was to articulate this well enough that you, as a viewer, could determine if you would like the movie. Your "best" movie is unique to you.
I saw Avatar 2 for the first time a couple weeks ago. So formulaic I was bored most of the movie. A Disney cartoon has more originality.
I'm not gonna yuck anyone's yum. If a person likes these movies (as clearly, lots of people do), good for them. I saw the first avatar in the theater however the fuck long ago that movie came out now. It was pretty, and as you say, boring as hell. It'll be the only Avatar film I ever see.
I actually enjoyed Avatar 2 more than Avatar 1 because they spent so much time basically not progressing the story and showing me the local fauna. The story is terrible, but I would 100% watch a BBC Pandora Wild Life series.
Top Gun Maverick was no different.
Maybe the most predictable movie I've seen in recent years. I was entirely bored (outside the scene of Mavrick proving the run was doable. Those shots through the canyon were fantasic.) But that's not enough to redeem the rest being wholly unoriginal.
somehow it still has doubters
Maybe not everyone likes 'sci-fi Pocahontas'?
I so don't get it. I couldn't even finish the first one, it was so boring. I'm glad people can enjoy things, im just very confused by what they do enjoy.
It's so terribly transparent and unoriginal.
doubters? its a movie. either you like it or you don't. The first one was alright but not good enough for me to watch any of the sequels although I might if they are free on some streaming thing and I have the time. Not sure I could convince my wife to watch them with me though.
They’re event films that you want to see for the spectacle. That’s what they have going for them. They leave the same impression as a fireworks show, which is why everyone goes but no one talks about it afterward.
The first one was beautiful, but utter crap in terms of writing, story and acting so I didn't bother seeing the others.
Sci-fi pocahontas is apt.
Too fucking long, anyway. Movies need to go back to being 90 minutes standard, cut some schlock.
Movies need to go back to being 90 minutes standard
When was that? When you were a kid?
Kids movies are still 90min.
doesn't like long movies, watches long movie anyway
surprised pikachu face
I don’t care if it is sci-fi Pocahontas. The first one was pretty. I haven’t seen the other two.
One of my favorite anime series is a pretty clear ripoff of an older series. Fans debate it but it’s crystal clear to most who’ve seen both. And here I am just saying, isn’t it awesome we have both?
I mean obviously if the reused story beats are compelling enough to create a new franchise, people aren’t tired of it. If they were, it wouldn’t sell and they’d stop reusing it.
Oh hey look, we’re getting yet another Robin Hood movie. We got another Count of Monte Cristo last year. It’s fine. People love these stories. They will keep coming as long as they keep selling.
Shit they even remade Nosferatu and it was awesome
It baffles me that people watch this. The first was bad enough. But seven sequels?
That article title is spot.
Oldest and Dumbest debate.
No cultural significance …herpa derp…
I just like movies and being entertained. Sometimes I want a deep story with intricate twists and turns and complex characters. Other times I just want to watch big explosions and watch a bunch of lasers flying at people.
There's room in this universe for all kinds of movies. I don't get why so many people here feel the need to come in and say "yeah well I didn't like it/it's not a good story because I found it boring."
Stop generalizing your opinions as if it's how everyone feels; you're dangerously close to closing yourself in an echochamber of opinions.
It doesn't need to be good to be popular. Now let's dust off and nuke the smurfs from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.