timely bump, was just pondering snagging the blue ray but was wondering if it's okay enough on a tele after watching this in imax 3d Ex

Probably when I turned 16.

Seriously, though, you guys are the reason Hollywood makes one decent movie every 5 years and went completely downhill after the 90s.

Also, you left out the rest of my quote, the most important part.

I suggest you round up the rest of you that like boring movies and have them start going to the boring movies more often so that they start making money and then Hollywood can make more of your boring movies. The rest of us that like watching things blow up seem to be driving their economy.

Darn.

The obvious problem is you think things have to blow up every 5 minutes otherwise it's a "boring" movie. For me, too much action is boring. That's the interesting thing about action in stories, if you use it sparingly and at the precise moments, its effects are much, much more powerful.

So far this movie year has been awful, but something tells me it will end the year with a bang! :thumbsup

I watched it last night. I thought it was good. I didn't think it was as good as all the hype made it out to be, but I enjoyed it, thought it was visually very interesting and I am glad I saw it.

Worst movie ever made, so bad, it was horrendously bad.

That's why I'm hesitant to get the bluray, the film was quite the spectacle on imax but ....

It was plain stupid ...

You still trolling this thread you miserable, joyless prick?

The consensus is that this movie is good. That's already been determined by people who actually like, and pay to go see movies. Not download it and "turn it off" after 45 minutes.

I hope you find some way to find enjoyment in your life. Actually, I don't.

And trust me...I watch and enjoy far more "slow" movies that you do.

sorry, the movie was garbage....I hate Mel Gibson but this was a joke

getting a re-release in imax 3d again next weekend. Going to check that out before a BLU Ray rewatch.

You have to take J. Falcon with a grain of salt. Remember, this is the guy who not too long ago made a post declaring that Scorsese, Tarantino, Spielberg, Christopher Nolan and P.T. Anderson are the five more overrated directors of all time.

Most things in life, including, movies, TV, music, food, clothes etc are all subjective. To me J.Falcon comes off like one of those guys who likes a band until they get popular then hates them because they sold out and needs to tell everyone how he liked them first.

Oh I see. So he's one of those critics, except he hates everything that's good.

Thanks for the heads up, I'm thinking of going back to check it out. My last foray to the theater was terminator genisys.

Sounds like a plan... Its worth watching.

Sorry, you must be too stupid to understand. Let me make it clearer:

Slow doesn't mean good. Fast doesn't mean bad. Movies are good because they actually make you think about something, doesn't matter what that is, if it's deep or superficial, relevant to your own experience or not. Mindless entertainment is why Hollywood makes the crap they make, so keep eating it up.

The consensus means shit, pretty sure anyone can agree.

You have me all wrong. I'm not like that at all. I just can't for the life of me believe what is considered a "great" movie these days. And for this garbage to be mentioned as a masterpiece is just mind boggling. We live in the fast food era of entertainment: we want things fast, cheap and tasty.

So a piece of art like Fury Road (made by one of the greatest living filmmakers) isn't really about anything....because you don't have the ability to look beyond the action. But what am I talking about? You didn't even watch it because you're too cool.

It's a movie that told it's story through action, not dialogue -- exactly the way movies did before they had the luxury of sound. So it's more pure cinema than you give it credit for. Characters yapping for two hours don't make a good movie.

The problem is, this movie was terrible, no way anyone could think it is a masterpiece. That is unless of course a masterpiece is a steaming pile of shit.

I will agree that I don't understand why people are calling it a masterpiece. I enjoyed and I think the word that might describe it best is cool, but to me it isn't a masterpiece.

That's just it though, I don't think the effectively told a good story through action. Given that I've seen the originals, it should have been easy for me to follow along, but I was left with too many unanswered questions with the back story. For me it felt like 2 hours of the continuation of the train scene from Thunder Dome. It never really felt like a reboot. The actors all did a fine job though.

I guess it's a piece of art in the sense that all movies are art (in some way) but other than that, you calling this movie art is laughable. Your next problem is calling George Miller one of the greatest living filmmakers. Seriously?

I don't think it's not about anything. Of course it's about something. But the story is of little importance; what's important is the eye-candy: explosions, car chases, bizarre costumes, hot girls, futuristic weapons, and basically all the over-the-top bullshit. So if it's about anything, it's about holding the attention of someone who thinks watching 2 hours of that is entertaining.

Silent films didn't tell their stories through hyped up, mindless action. So I'm not sure what you're getting at here. But I'll take a silent flick over this garbage any day.

And about your last comment, it seems like you STILL don't understand what I'm saying. Characters don't have to talk throughout the whole movie for it to good. I love action in a movie, but like I said before: "That's the interesting thing about action in stories, if you use it sparingly and at the precise moments, its effects are much, much more powerful. "

:2 cents:

we rewatched interstellar last nite. talk about a slow-burn mind fuck. i got caught sighing and rolling my eyes several times over the plot/message. even though, it's still an entertaining flick.

I hated that piece of shit too.

That was my favorite movie of last year easily.

Why don't you give us some hints on what's a good movie? What did you like recently, oh Great Omnipotent Arbiter of Taste? I'm sure that whatever you list will make everything clear to us why you have such refined cinematic tastes.

Another masterpiece, was it?

i hear ya. i'm not saying it's a bad movie at all, i didn't walk out on it at the theater nor felt like walking away from it last night. it is a cool movie. but i do think the morality play in it was contrived. as well as the conclusion- love solves equations. and i had forgotten mat damon comes out of nowhere! :helpme

again, not a bad movie and entertaining enough to keep my attention for what, 2.5 hours? long movie. i just didn't agree with the forced morality message and the plot points required to set that up. murphy for instance, just not a welldone character development for her. her love for her dad was so strong she rejected him at the most crucial point in both their lives and continued that rejection for decades ultimately turning that into a belief her dad abandoned her? simply to setup the conclusion that love solves everything. then to have her on her death bed basically reject her dad when he shows up? that's weird.

also, i brought it up in this thread because i think it's a good counter to fury road.

I'm not sure if that was a rejection....

I guess most people could have quibbles about the emotional elements and character motivations. I was mostly in awe of the filmmaking as a whole. The use of mostly practical, old school effects and the score (with the bombastic church organs) was just something like I haven't heard in years and fit perfectly with the visuals -- especially that crazy docking scene.

that's part of why i brought it up here. it was visually as stunning as fury road, but takes a different direction with the slow burn plot. interstellar is very much a 2001 a space oydessy style movie and takes quite a few cues from 2001 but puts a spin on them i was thinking last night. instead of the computer betraying man, it's man betraying man. i thought the TAR was also very much an ode to the monolith and the conclusion with coop going through the black hole was a different angle of bowman's travel through space at the conclusion of 2001. the sountrack style also was reminiscant.

I liked the pregnant woman

Movies SUCK today for these reasons:

1. They are written, cast and filmed for the foreign market, where 75% of the profits exist. The more action and explosions the less sub-titles and therefore more people around the world can watch and understand the film.

2. Movies are filmed today with the DVD release in mind, often filming DVD-only Bonus scenes during principal photography. Therefore there is an internal economic pressure to "fill out" the movie, stretching it too long so there's reason to buy the DVD. This makes the plot, pacing and last act bloated and overwrought.

3. Studios know the only metric that truly determines a film's success, failure or break even is the Opening Weekend box office. Period. So hype the fuck out of a film and get as many asses in the seats that first weekend and the rest is gravy. Besides, what are people going to do? UNwatch the movie and get back two hours of their lives? Hardly.

And I won't even go into the socio-political reason for so many explosions in Hollywood films today. Let's just say the Gov't "supports" such an environment, where constant violence and war help de-sensitize the population.

Blah blah, movies suck today. Carry on.

I agree with most of what you say, but this is the part I can relate to most:

for me, the problem with movies in 2015 isn't the caliber of movie, it's the shitty experience of going to the movies. what a fucking nightmare, i mean really. i agree some movies have been fucked up by hollywood execs, terminator genisys, jesus fucking christ they destroyed that franchise, concept and everything by dumbing it all down to pg-13.

but the shitty experience of a movie theater is a huge problem for me.

You can check some of my threads about movies to see what I like. But to give an example that I can also enjoy fast-paced, action-packed films, taking them for what they are, I thought Edge of Tomorrow was fun. Far from a masterpiece or even a great movie, it was decent and "entertained me" I guess I liked the Groundhogs Day style plot and the way the science-fiction-style war was kind of like a video game, where you know where the bad guys are coming from all the time. It's bubble gum movie making for the masses, but at least it doesn't go completely over the top like Road Fury or take it itself too seriously like Interstellar.

cruise does a solid sci-fi! the other one, oblivion, is solid too. also, the MI: franchise overall i think does a solid job. all of them stand up to repeat viewings, for me that's the telltale of a good job by hollywood. can i watch it more than once.

I don't go to the movie theater hardly ever for several reasons. But the main reason is (and I think I made this clear) I hate about 85% of the stuff made today. With those odds, I almost always end up watching something I don't like and regretting it. I have extremely bad luck when it comes to choosing what movies I decide to watch at the theater.

While we are on the subject, if you want to add another reason why movies suck these days, it's because some movies can ONLY be truly enjoyed in 3D, IMAX, etc. If the only way to truly enjoy a movie is to watch on the big screen, then it's not a good movie.

Some solid arguments but this one is way off. We foreigners don't care about how much sub titles a movie has, we grew up with it and it's 2nd nature. It really doesnt cross anyones minds here, plus you learn to speak english from it. That's why everyone here speaks their native language and english.

The reason for more action and explosions is this: People are dumb. But the biggest sign that the overage movie-goer is completely stupid, is the popularity of superhero movies.
I can live with a nice dumb action movie, hell i like those just as much as i liked for example a great movie like Nightcrawler. Example of an action movie i liked is John Wick.

But superhero movies and Transformer movies are so repetitive, childish and dumb, yet they are the ones pulling the big audiences. Proof that the average movie goer is stupid.

the people are dumb comments are tiresome. you do realize you are people right? someone somewhere is claiming people are dumb, i.e., everyone is dumb. and if everyone is dumb then everyone has always been dumb, we're not dumber now than we've ever been as people, we're smarter.

movies are simplified to get a pg rating so families will take the entire family to a movie, buy the merch, etc. that's simply based on the math.

the average age of a movie goer is 12-17, so yes, according to adult levels of intelligence, the average movie goer is dumb, he's 15.

thus my question re: should i buy the fury road bluray :winkwink:

You realize your conclusion is that you agree with me?

Not everyone who is 13 is dumb when i look at my own youth. When i was that age my favourite movies were Predator, Rambo first blood, Terminator 2, all movies who have stood the test of time and still are extremely well made movies. You cannot compare that to Transformers or a shield chucker against machine gun wielding armies (captain america).

It kind of sucks to just rule out an entire category of movie because you feel like it's beneath you.

I like dumb ass comedies and action/superhero movies as much as I like slow indie, character driven movies with subtle filmmaking style. I know the difference and can find something to enjoy about any type of flick. I feel like the artsy films are superior, but that doesn't mean I don't enjoy The Avengers.

I used to think I was a critic, but I've found more enjoyment from movies going in wanting to like it. A movie has to fuck up really bad for me to just write it off as garbage.

As far as movies sucking these days...if you can't find good movies, just aren't looking hard enough. It's the same thing as people who say rock and roll is dead. Fuck no, it's not. There's more awesome bands than ever if you look in the right places.

Spot on! I cannot stand going to the movies these days. Plus the previews are out of control. Last time I went they had 12 of them. 12! Way too many.

Plus in my neighborhood no one will STFU during a movie. Drives me nuts. I'd rather stay home and watch it on my 70 inch flatscreen.

Well, international also means the Asian market (which is huge). But yeah, sub titles are a given and a great way to learn another language. So there's something positive I guess. LOL

But I agree 100% about these idiotic superhero movies. I hate them and they keep coming nonstop every year. Enough with the Batmans and Spidermans please.

But there's an old saying: "No one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the average citizen."

yes, i wasn't disagreeing per se. i was clarifying...specifying...i'm not trying to win an argument here, i like movies. i think you think people (adults) are stupid because movies have been made for 12-17 year olds because those make the most money.

i don't think it's accurate to then conclude people are stupid when the average age of that group is 15. that's all i'm saying. well that and the argument/observation that everyone else is stupid. that one always seemed off to me. others somewhere/somplace think people are stupid because of your position on a topic. not saying you are stupid, i don't believe you are, but you see what i am saying i bet.

I would argue that it is more along the lines of "big studio movies suck in 2015." There are plenty of very good movies being made, but they are harder to find these days and may never get a theatrical release.

Case in point. Go here: New Movie Releases - Metacritic

That is a list of current movies out right now sorted by average score. There are over 100 movies on that list that rated 61 or higher and are considered by critics and audiences to be good. Obviously there are things there that won't be for everyone or just not your taste, but there have to be a handful of movies on there that you would like and think are good.

The problem is that 15 years ago a lot of the movies would have gotten a wider release and would have slowly built up an audience, but these days with piracy once the movie is out it can be seen everywhere online within a few days and it makes it harder for many of these small movies to build up an audience. So studios aren't as willing to take a chance on them and they would rather bet on something they think is a sure thing to make them money.

There is a lot of truth to what you say, but that doesn't mean that there aren't plenty of good movies out there, you just have to go look for them.

I've always gone into movies with the attitude where I am looking for two things. 1. What does the movie want to be or do? 2. Does it then do that.

For example. If it is a comedy then does it make me laugh and enjoy it. A good comedy is a movie that has a several big laughs in it and a handful of smaller laughs sprinkled throughout. A bad comedy is one where all the funny parts are in the trailer and the rest is kind of boring.

A person and enjoy the Avengers and an art house film equally for different reasons so long as each of those movies know what they want to be and then deliver on that.

Great points!! And I agree, smaller films are harder to find but well worth the search. Thanks for that link, it's a great list!

Yes, piracy is a key factor. I remember when movies would be out in theaters for weeks or months. Sometimes we wouldn't get to see everything we wanted to in May or June and could still catch the big releases in July or even August. Not anymore, and a lot of movies miss out on loyal audiences because of this.

Think The Princess Bride or My Big Fat Greek Wedding or The Blair Witch project, etc. Small movies that built up a HUGE audience on word of mouth. Today they wouldn't stand a chance.

i'm not seeing the piracy is why movies cater to the lowest common denominator argument.