Search forums

Forums

Export thread

What is the worst part of your favorite movies?

Aug 19, 2014#1

MindDetective

My wife and I were just chuckling about the terrible song over the credits at the end of Princess Bride bringing this topic to mind.

I also remember the audience laughing when Luke whines to his aunt and uncle towards the beginning of Star Wars.

Any others spring to mind?

Aug 19, 2014#2

PatrThom

They were arguably the exact right people to do the voices.
But the singing? Uf.

--Patrick

Aug 19, 2014#3

Celt Z

PatrThom said:
They were arguably the exact right people to do the voices.
But the singing? Uf.

--Patrick

I like that song, but probably because on the soundtrack it's not Mia Farrow singing. (Uf, indeed.)

Aug 19, 2014#4

Cajungal

Ooh I've gotta check out the soundtrack.

Aug 19, 2014#5

HCGLNS

Aug 19, 2014#6

Hailey Knight

Good movies will never satisfy their lust for bad scenes.

Aug 19, 2014#7

Hailey Knight

I'd like to contribute, but I'm trying to think of anything bad in my favorites. The tai-chi silhouette in The Fountain was pretty cheezy, but it was like 20 seconds.

I might have to break this down to just "movies I love" and not my absolute favorites. The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly has no weaknesses.

Aug 19, 2014#8

ThatNickGuy

Even though I love the Christopher Reeve movies, I have a lot of problems with them:
-The first one only really gets interesting once he hits Metropolis. Everything before that just drags on way too long.
-The turning back time by spinning around the earth.
-Gene Hackman, who is basically just Gene Hackman playing Gene Hackman (see also: Jack Nicholas playing Jack Nicholson in Batman)

Honestly, my favourite stuff is all in the middle, with Superman flying around town and stopping crimes, and of course the helicopter rescue.

As for 2? Yeah, it's all over the place. Zod is fantastic in every scene, but Superman giving up his powers just didn't do it for me. And my favourite scene of all time, which is also my favourite scene in cinema, is also ruined by the fact that people argue whether Superman killed them or not. It's too ambiguous to bother arguing with them. I just love how Superman beats them, outwitting them and taking away their powers. And of course, the final fight scene in the Fortress is incredibly stupid.

Aug 19, 2014#9

Hailey Knight

ThatNickGuy said:
Even though I love the Christopher Reeve movies, I have a lot of problems with them:
-The first one only really gets interesting once he hits Metropolis. Everything before that just drags on way too long.
-The turning back time by spinning around the earth.
-Gene Hackman, who is basically just Gene Hackman playing Gene Hackman (see also: Jack Nicholas playing Jack Nicholson in Batman)

Honestly, my favourite stuff is all in the middle, with Superman flying around town and stopping crimes, and of course the helicopter rescue.

I'm stunned that I'm going to have to defend Superman: The Movie from you of all people, especially since I only first saw that movie as an adult, so don't have any childhood notions about it.

Pre-Metropolis: While the school-related elements of Smallville are a little dull, they do matter for the development of what's going on. That said, not interesting? The destruction of Krypton, Kal-El learning from his father during the space flight, Jonathan Kent, the journey to the Arctic? This was all good stuff and showed a great deal of respect for the material. While the movie doesn't get as comic booky until later, that first act is a strong demonstration of "We are taking this seriously" and not a grim way, but in a way to give a sense of wonder to the concept before the costume goes on.

Turning back time: This entire segment is excellent from the moment he lands by the burial mound of the car. Reeves sells that moment of anguish without a word, and when he does speak, it's guttural and raw. To then fly up into the clouds and here the conflicting messages of his two fathers, and having to decide who he is, is a great character moment. It's the kind of thing that makes a Superman story, because we know he really can't be defeated, but to show that despite his great powers and ideals, humanity has rubbed off on him--this makes him a relatable character. The music sells the spinning sequence by itself, but I'll break it down for the soulless mo-fos in this forum--there's an emotional height to his actions, how far he's willing to go to undo this. Anyone who's lost someone they love wishes it hadn't happened and some would turn back time for another moment. Well, Superman can actually do it. In the same fantasy of stopping wrongdoing that led to Superman's creation, this is a moment where Superman can live out another aspect of wish fulfillment, of doing the impossible. And then the beautiful finish to this sequence, where he lands beside the car again, but it isn't buried. Lois is still fucking around with getting it started, gets out, goes on and on about how crappy this day has been for her, without a clue to how bad it could have been, and all he can do is stare at her and be relieved she's still alive.

I'm not gonna defend Gene Hackman--there are some actors where you hire them to be who they are, and that's what you're going to get. I thought it was a good performance, not as good as Kevin Spacey decades later, but it worked for the movie.

TLDR:

Is it possible, Nick, that you've seen this movie so many times that you can't truly appreciate it anymore? Maybe I'll just have to watch it tomorrow and appreciate it for you; you're clearly not up to the task. You've changed. I don't know you anymore.

Aug 19, 2014#10

bhamv3

I'm sure you guys are familiar with the theory that Superman isn't actually reversing the spin of the Earth in that scene. He's flying so fast he's going back in time, which results in the Earth's spin reversing.

Aug 19, 2014#11

Hailey Knight

bhamv3 said:
I'm sure you guys are familiar with the theory that Superman isn't actually reversing the spin of the Earth in that scene. He's flying so fast he's going back in time, which results in the Earth's spin reversing.

It's not just a theory; it's what's happening in the movie, and the only reason you hear mention of Einstein's theory of relativity near the beginning of the movie--that's exactly what Superman puts into effect, going faster than the speed of light so that he's going backward in time. The Earth spinning backward is just giving us a visual of what he's experiencing.

In short, yes

Aug 19, 2014#12

ThatNickGuy

I'm not wrong, it's just my opinion. I find the pre-Metropolis stuff dry, too drawn out, and slow paced. That's how I feel about it. You can view it a different way all you like.

I'll grant you that his anguish over Lois was effective, but it's just the going back in time stuff that I find silly. It's like a reset button. I just don't like it, that's all. Almost as bad as the Amnesia Kiss.

I don't know. Maybe the movie has just soured for me over the years. To be fair, it's been a very long time (at least a decade) since the last time I actually sat down and watched any of the Reeve movies. Own them on BluRay and never actually watched them. Pretty sad, I guess.

Aug 19, 2014#13

Hailey Knight

ThatNickGuy said:
I'm not wrong, it's just my opinion. I find the pre-Metropolis stuff dry, too drawn out, and slow paced. That's how I feel about it. You can view it a different way all you like.

I'll grant you that his anguish over Lois was effective, but it's just the going back in time stuff that I find silly. It's like a reset button. I just don't like it, that's all. Almost as bad as the Amnesia Kiss.

I don't know. Maybe the movie has just soured for me over the years. To be fair, it's been a very long time (at least a decade) since the last time I actually sat down and watched any of the Reeve movies. Own them on BluRay and never actually watched them. Pretty sad, I guess.

Oh, that kiss. When I first saw Superman II (which, funny enough, was before I saw the first one), I had no idea that was coming. I just thought, "Wow, they'll actually have to address this for the series, and both of them will have to deal with this, and--ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME?!" I fortunately didn't shout this like I almost did in the movie screening room at the back of the student center ... I literally had to force my jaw to clap shut.

It's too bad you don't have a Blu Ray player. Sucks.

Aug 19, 2014#14

ThatNickGuy

Zero Esc said:
It's too bad you don't have a Blu Ray player. Sucks.

...but I do have one?

Aug 19, 2014#15

Hailey Knight

ThatNickGuy said:
...but I do have one?

ThatNickGuy said:
To be fair, it's been a very long time (at least a decade) since the last time I actually sat down and watched any of the Reeve movies. Own them on BluRay and never actually watched them. Pretty sad, I guess.

Aug 19, 2014#16

ThatNickGuy

Right, that doesn't mean I don't have a player. That means I own them on BluRay but never actually watched them for some reason. I don't know why. I'd upgraded from the DVD collection I had previously.

Aug 19, 2014#17

Hailey Knight

Alternatively, there's this.

Aug 19, 2014#18

Chad Sexington

This will be unpopular, but the whole boat thing in Dark Knight.

It was so unexciting and underwhelming for such a good movie. Of course neither boat is gonna blow up the other boat. Of course that tough looking criminal is gonna save the day(ish). Ugh. That whole ending should have been so much better.

Aug 20, 2014#19

Hailey Knight

Chad Sexington said:
This will be unpopular, but the whole boat thing in Dark Knight.

It was so unexciting and underwhelming for such a good movie. Of course neither boat is gonna blow up the other boat. Of course that tough looking criminal is gonna save the day(ish). Ugh. That whole ending should have been so much better.

Wellll, guess I don't get a break tonight. Time to school somebody else on their wrongness about a DC universe movie, particularly a good one--

Nah, I lost my energy for that. I will say that I found it tense, and perhaps I didn't find it unpredictable because I tend not to make assumptions. Dating/being married to someone for years who gets on your ass for making assumptions all the time will do that.

Aug 20, 2014#20

bhamv3

I thought the way that boat scene was going to play out would be that one boat (or both) would press the button, but it turns out it blows up their own boat.

Aug 20, 2014#21

Bowielee

Since we're pointing out bad moments in Superman movies, well, the obvious joke is, ALL of Superman Returns except for Kevin Spacey.

For serious, though, that movie was underwhelming as shit.
Maybe that's why Nick became unenamored of the Reeves movies. Because he loves Superman Returns and everyone rags on it for being a poor attempt to live in the shadow of those movies. Which is totally true.

In the Reeves movies.. of which there were only 2, and no one will tell me any differently.

Seriously... what the hell is this?

Aug 20, 2014#22

fade

PatrThom said:
They were arguably the exact right people to do the voices.
But the singing? Uf.

--Patrick

I didn't care much for the movie at all. The book is one of my absolute favorites, filled with jaw-dropping prose and I just felt the movie ripped the heart out of it. Where is the magic in the Robin Hood scene? Where are men crying at Robin Hood's passing? Where's the terror and majesty of the Bull. Where is Haggard's black depression? And where Lir's gut-wrenching monologue? And Mommy Fortuna--holy crap my skin crawls every single time I read her parts. And some characters get pushed aside, and I'm yelling at the screen like, "DUDE, there are at least 9 characters who present their opposing views on mortality and the passage of time, where is that mystery?" I mean elements are there but they deserve to be done so much better.

Aug 20, 2014#23

Charlie Don't Surf

The way I'm interpreting it is - the worst part of a favorite movie can still be pretty good? So like, every movie is gonna have a worst part unless it's the same thing for 90 minutes.

Jaws - it's a little cheesy when the mom looks at her kids on the boat dock, then looks at a picture of a shark, then looks up again and is like "HEY KIDS COME BACK TO THE HOUSE GET OFF THE BOAT"

Aug 20, 2014#24

Terrik

Pretty much the 2nd half of Wall-E except for a certain part or two.

Aug 20, 2014#25

Hailey Knight

Charlie Don't Surf said:
The way I'm interpreting it is - the worst part of a favorite movie can still be pretty good? So like, every movie is gonna have a worst part unless it's the same thing for 90 minutes.

Jaws - it's a little cheesy when the mom looks at her kids on the boat dock, then looks at a picture of a shark, then looks up again and is like "HEY KIDS COME BACK TO THE HOUSE GET OFF THE BOAT"

To be fair, that picture was of a shark tearing into a little boat like the one her kid was in.

But you're right, it should be interpreted that even the worst part can be pretty good. I'm not even sure people are grabbing faves as opposed to "good movie with a bad part".

The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly, I guess it'd be the part where Tuco marches Blondie through the desert. Though it has funny parts and leads to the plot finally getting underway, it takes a while to get to that point and is one of the few parts of the movie that's slow without feeling like it builds to a scene-climax. It does build towards one, but doesn't feel like it.

Aug 20, 2014#26

Dave

"Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind". I love that movie, but the side plot about Kirsten Dunst and Tom Wilkinson just rubs me the wrong way. I think part is because I think it's really unbelievable and the other because I HAAAAAAAAAAATE her.

Aug 20, 2014#27

@Li3n

Zero Esc said:
Turning back time: This entire segment is excellent from the moment he lands by the burial mound of the car. Reeves sells that moment of anguish without a word, and when he does speak, it's guttural and raw. To then fly up into the clouds and here the conflicting messages of his two fathers, and having to decide who he is, is a great character moment. It's the kind of thing that makes a Superman story, because we know he really can't be defeated, but to show that despite his great powers and ideals, humanity has rubbed off on him--this makes him a relatable character. The music sells the spinning sequence by itself, but I'll break it down for the soulless mo-fos in this forum--there's an emotional height to his actions, how far he's willing to go to undo this. Anyone who's lost someone they love wishes it hadn't happened and some would turn back time for another moment. Well, Superman can actually do it. In the same fantasy of stopping wrongdoing that led to Superman's creation, this is a moment where Superman can live out another aspect of wish fulfillment, of doing the impossible. And then the beautiful finish to this sequence, where he lands beside the car again, but it isn't buried. Lois is still fucking around with getting it started, gets out, goes on and on about how crappy this day has been for her, without a clue to how bad it could have been, and all he can do is stare at her and be relieved she's still alive.

No one is complaining about the acting or stuff like that, but about it being one of those deus ex machina endings that showcases why there are no stakes in a Superman adventure...

bhamv3 said:
I thought the way that boat scene was going to play out would be that one boat (or both) would press the button, but it turns out it blows up their own boat.

No, no, no, the non-criminals press it (or Joker does), and it turns out it's just confetti... because fuck you, that's how the joker rolls, he's not just about killing people...

Aug 20, 2014#28

drawn_inward

I really like Godfather II better than Godfather I, but I can't think anything in Godfather II that I don't like, but in Godfather I I really don't care for Sonny's death scene. It's a bit melodramatic. It was supposed to be shocking, but it went on too long and James Caan just tried too hard.

Aug 20, 2014#29

Covar

drawn_inward said:
I really like Godfather II better than Godfather I, but I can't think anything in Godfather II that I don't like, but in Godfather I I really don't care for Sonny's death scene. It's a bit melodramatic. It was supposed to be shocking, but it went on too long and James Caan just tried too hard.

It gives us one the greatest lines in cinema though.

Since Street Fighter is the perfect movie, I'm going to toss Raiders of the Lost Ark into the discussion. Amazing movie despite it's big flaw that consumes the entire film.

Aug 20, 2014#30

drawn_inward

Covar said:
Since Street Fighter is the perfect movie, I'm going to toss Raiders of the Lost Ark into the discussion. Amazing movie despite it's big flaw that consumes the entire film.

Which is?

Aug 20, 2014#31

@Li3n

drawn_inward said:
Which is?

You don't watch The Big Bang Theory, do you... (not that i blame you, it's such a cavalcade of stereotypes)

Aug 20, 2014#32

ZenMonkey

Seriously I wanna slap Diane Keaton here too. Not the content, the delivery. Michael's slow burn is the only good part of this junior high school drama audition.

Aug 20, 2014#33

Covar

drawn_inward said:
Which is?

Spoilering since it is the entire movie...and will change how you see it from now on.

Everything that takes place in the movie would happen with or without Indiana Jones. You could edit him out and things would still play out largely the same as they did. The only real difference would be the time frame. Nazis still would have obtained the Ark, still would have taken it to the Island, still would have opened it and died.

@Li3n said:
You don't watch The Big Bang Theory, do you... (not that i blame you, it's such a cavalcade of stereotypes)

The biggest problem I had with that episode is that none of the guys had known about it already. It's not a new observation by any stretch of the imagination

Aug 20, 2014#34

Dave

I had never considered it until that episode.

I love Big Bang Theory.

Aug 20, 2014#35

Adam

...Oh WORST PART of favourite movie, not BEST PART..

Not the best acting seen from either of them. And yes, I like Moulin Rouge, fuck you.

Aug 20, 2014#36

fade

Moulin Rouge was great ... until the end. It was just so abrupt. It was like, "movie movie mov--OKAY GO HOME".

Aug 20, 2014#37

drawn_inward

ZenMonkey said:
Seriously I wanna slap Diane Keaton here too. Not the content, the delivery. Michael's slow burn is the only good part of this junior high school drama audition.

Yeah, that's true, but that whole story line gets me though. It's so rough especially when it comes to the kids and Freddo. I think that Breaking Bad tried to capture some of this, but couldn't quite get it (though Breaking Bad is great).

Aug 20, 2014#38

Adam

fade said:
Moulin Rouge was great ... until the end. It was just so abrupt. It was like, "movie movie mov--OKAY GO HOME".

Yeah, I hate to be that 'focus group participant', but for a movie with such passion, energy and enthusiasm, the end just flatlined.

Aug 20, 2014#39

drawn_inward

@Li3n said:
You don't watch The Big Bang Theory, do you... (not that i blame you, it's such a cavalcade of stereotypes)

No - I don't. And, yes, it is. I can't stand the canned laugh either.[DOUBLEPOST=1408565258,1408565154][/DOUBLEPOST]

Covar said:
Spoilering since it is the entire movie...and will change how you see it from now on.

Everything that takes place in the movie would happen with or without Indiana Jones. You could edit him out and things would still play out largely the same as they did. The only real difference would be the time frame. Nazis still would have obtained the Ark, still would have taken it to the Island, still would have opened it and died.

The biggest problem I had with that episode is that none of the guys had known about it already. It's not a new observation by any stretch of the imagination

Oh well. It's still a great movie to me, but that's really funny to think about that.

Aug 20, 2014#40

ZenMonkey

drawn_inward said:
Yeah, that's true, but that whole story line gets me though. It's so rough especially when it comes to the kids and Freddo.

Well, that's why Keaton's moaning and scenery-chewing is just the worst part of an overall favorite.

Although I think Pacino took some tips from her for his future shouty-screamy performances in the '80s-'90s and beyond.

Aug 20, 2014#41

fade

What about the whole "finding the ark" bit. Marion would've still fought back, and they would've still probably used the burn to build the wrong staff.

Aug 20, 2014#42

ZenMonkey

drawn_inward said:
Oh well. It's still a great movie to me, but that's really funny to think about that.

Actually, this has been discussed and debunked by fanboys & -girls long before the BBT episode. Which definitely was funny, BUT:

None of it would have happened if the Americans hadn't intercepted the telegram and gone to ask Indy about it. The Germans would never have found out about the headpiece if Toht hadn't followed Indy after that.

At least I think that's the right explanation.

fade said:
What about the whole "finding the ark" bit. Marion would've still fought back, and they would've still probably used the burn to build the wrong staff.

Marian didn't cause the place to burn down. She would have fought, sure, but there's no possible way she would have won against those guys without Indy. They'd have killed her and taken the medallion.

Aug 20, 2014#43

Ravenpoe

How about the best part of terrible movies?

Every scene with Electro in it was fantastic in The Amazing Spider-Man 2, while everything else (about two hours worth of other movie) was absolute shit.

Aug 20, 2014#44

drawn_inward

ZenMonkey said:
Although I think Pacino took some tips from her for his future shouty-screamy performances in the '80s-'90s and beyond.

I know! It's like he is two different actors. Godfather III is bad on so many levels, but one of the most jarring is that Pacino's change.

Aug 20, 2014#45

ZenMonkey

Ravenpoe said:
How about the best part of terrible movies?

Probably should be a separate thread, but speaking of Spider-Man I think the Sandman's creation scene in Raimi's third is one of the most beautiful sequences I've ever seen.

drawn_inward said:
I know! It's like he is two different actors. Godfather III is bad on so many levels, but one of the most jarring is that Pacino's change.

That is honestly my second biggest problem with III. (The first is Coppola actually bragging that they designed the movie beat for beat from the story structure of the first one. As if shamelessly ripping yourself off were a virtue.) What I love about Michael in I and II is that he's so quiet, when he does actually yell it's frightening and makes an impact, like at Kay at the very end of I. In III he screams so much there's zero impact no matter what he says. I completely agree it's two different Pacinos and two different Michaels. I really don't think the elder Michael would behave at all the way he was written and/or how Pacino played him in III.

Aug 20, 2014#46

PatrThom

fade said:
Moulin Rouge was great ... until the end. It was just so abrupt. It was like, "movie movie mov--OKAY GO HOME".

I felt the same way about The Believers. Way to flush all the setup down the toilet, Mark Frost.

I feel like a restrictions should be imposed on this thread, that you can't post any clip/scene that could be described as "the ending," otherwise there's gonna be a LOT of stuff that's just "Well, yeah."

--Patrick

Aug 22, 2014#47

Null

Margo Kiddo's wierd internal monologue while Superman's taking her flying. Just... what...

The "Thunder Battle" in The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey. A completely unnecessary sequence that dragged, added nothing to the story, and actually crossed some lines as far as the world of Middle-Earth was concerned. It was just... "What the fuck?" It honestly made me enjoy the entire movie less.

Aug 22, 2014#48

Jay

Null said:
The "Thunder Battle" in The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey. A completely unnecessary sequence that dragged, added nothing to the story, and actually crossed some lines as far as the world of Middle-Earth was concerned. It was just... "What the fuck?" It honestly made me enjoy the entire movie less.

Both movies have a ridiculous segment that remove me from the movie.

1. What you wrote.

2. Next movie? The barrels in the river. I looked over to my bud and he was like, shrug.

Aug 22, 2014#49

Yoshimickster

The musical scenes at the end of most Dreamworks movies. So...so awkward.

Aug 22, 2014#50

Hailey Knight

Null said:
Margo Kiddo's wierd internal monologue while Superman's taking her flying. Just... what...

Yes.

Yoshimickster said:
The musical scenes at the end of most Dreamworks movies. So...so awkward.

YES.

Megamind was such a great movie, we were really loving it, and I still do, but then they just start dancing around for no reason cohesing with anything in the movie and it's as if Dreamworks management listed on the wall that every movie must end this way.

Aug 23, 2014#51

Null

Jay said:
Both movies have a ridiculous segment that remove me from the movie.

1. What you wrote.

2. Next movie? The barrels in the river. I looked over to my bud and he was like, shrug.

But at least that's in the goddamn books! The execution may be ridiculous, but at least there's a basis for it in the story. Chunks of the mountain coming to life as psychopathic stone giants killing each other? WTF?!

Aug 23, 2014#52

Just Me

Null said:
The "Thunder Battle" in The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey. A completely unnecessary sequence that dragged, added nothing to the story, and actually crossed some lines as far as the world of Middle-Earth was concerned. It was just... "What the fuck?" It honestly made me enjoy the entire movie less.

You can actually say that for almost every Peter Jackson movie.
The last 30 minutes of Hobbit 2, the whole dragon fight with the golden statue to top it off? Come on, PJ....

Aug 23, 2014#53

Hailey Knight

Null said:
But at least that's in the goddamn books! The execution may be ridiculous, but at least there's a basis for it in the story. Chunks of the mountain coming to life as psychopathic stone giants killing each other? WTF?!

The giants did battle during a thunderstorm in the book. They were just not right there, causing immediate danger to the party, but they did seek cover from them. Jackson just interpreted this as them being parts of the mountain, but they were tossing boulders at each other.

Aug 23, 2014#54

Just Me

"When he peeped out in the lightning-flashes, he saw that across the valley the stone-giants were out and were hurling rocks at one another for a game, and catching them, and tossing them down into the darkness where they smashed among the trees far below, or splintered into little bits with a bang."

I think there's a bit of over-interpreting making that into mountains coming alive and smashing into each other.
Pretty much the biggest part of the first Hobbit film I really disliked.

Aug 23, 2014#55

Hailey Knight

Just Me said:
"When he peeped out in the lightning-flashes, he saw that across the valley the stone-giants were out and were hurling rocks at one another for a game, and catching them, and tossing them down into the darkness where they smashed among the trees far below, or splintered into little bits with a bang."

I think there's a bit of over-interpreting making that into mountains coming alive and smashing into each other.
Pretty much the biggest part of the first Hobbit film I really disliked.

Making them part of the mountain isn't that big a stretch from stone giants.

Going from "playing a game" to "killing each other" is, though.

Aug 23, 2014#56

Ravenpoe

Zero Esc said:
Making them part of the mountain isn't that big a stretch from stone giants.

Going from "playing a game" to "killing each other" is, though.

Well, how do you know what stone giant games look like? They could have been playing.

None of these changes bother me in the least, because they're portrayed as what Bilbo wrote in his story for Frodo. So changes like that just seem like Bilbo being a good storyteller and adding in embellishments.

Aug 23, 2014#57

Hailey Knight

Ravenpoe said:
Well, how do you know what stone giant games look like? They could have been playing.

None of these changes bother me in the least, because they're portrayed as what Bilbo wrote in his story for Frodo. So changes like that just seem like Bilbo being a good storyteller and adding in embellishments.

Agreed, although I can understand someone saying that it padded out the movie and added nothing to the story. Of course, that was a lot of The Hobbit.

I can't be arsed to see the sequels. The trailers don't make me want to see them, they just make me wish I had LOTR on Blu-Ray.

Aug 23, 2014#58

Jay

I'd say you'd be doing yourself a disservice. The 2nd movie was solid and setup for a glorious third. The acting is very good and any middle earth fan should see a little something they'd like.

Just these scenes are bad....

Aug 23, 2014#59

Yoshimickster

The deleted scenes from Empire Records. They were deleted for a reason.

Aug 23, 2014#60

Bowielee

Pretty much any 80s movie where the bully of the story straight up tries to murder the protagonist with no ill consequences. Apparently all high schools back then were immune from any sort of law enforcement.

Examples:

Karate Kid
Goonies
Footloose (with a bonus woman beating scene on top of it)

This isn't bullies being bullies, these are straight up attempted murder.

Aug 23, 2014#61

Zappit

Okay, I'm an old school, Gen 1 Transformers junkie, and I love the 80's movie. It opens with a tremendous battle that wipes out a ton of major Autobot and Decepticons characters, contains the childhood-shattering death of Optimus Prime, and features a villain who freaking eats entire planets. We even see Unicron melting down survivors of his attacks in his innards. This movie was dark.

And then come the Junkions, complete with a dance sequence. Eric Idle doing television-esque quotes to cobble some English together? That's fine. Another instance of that ridiculous universal greeting? I can live with that. But after the Autobots suffer tremendous casualties, barely survive another encounter with Galvatron, and lose both of Cybertron's moons to Unicron, they dance. Ugh...

Aug 23, 2014#62

Bowielee

Zappit said:
Okay, I'm an old school, Gen 1 Transformers junkie, and I love the 80's movie. It opens with a tremendous battle that wipes out a ton of major Autobot and Decepticons characters, contains the childhood-shattering death of Optimus Prime, and features a villain who freaking eats entire planets. We even see Unicron melting down survivors of his attacks in his innards. This movie was dark.

And then come the Junkions, complete with a dance sequence. Eric Idle doing television-esque quotes to cobble some English together? That's fine. Another instance of that ridiculous universal greeting? I can live with that. But after the Autobots suffer tremendous casualties, barely survive another encounter with Galvatron, and lose both of Cybertron's moons to Unicron, they dance. Ugh...

To be fair, Dare to Be Stupid was playing. Being sentient beings with a soul, they had no choice but to dance.

Aug 23, 2014#63

Zappit

Bowielee said:
To be fair, Dare to Be Stupid was playing. Being sentient beings with a soul, they had no choice but to dance.

Looks nobody's arguing that. Weird Al's music is basically mandatory fun, but it just felt so out of place.

Aug 24, 2014#64

CynicismKills

Zappit said:
Okay, I'm an old school, Gen 1 Transformers junkie, and I love the 80's movie. It opens with a tremendous battle that wipes out a ton of major Autobot and Decepticons characters, contains the childhood-shattering death of Optimus Prime, and features a villain who freaking eats entire planets. We even see Unicron melting down survivors of his attacks in his innards. This movie was dark.

And then come the Junkions, complete with a dance sequence. Eric Idle doing television-esque quotes to cobble some English together? That's fine. Another instance of that ridiculous universal greeting? I can live with that. But after the Autobots suffer tremendous casualties, barely survive another encounter with Galvatron, and lose both of Cybertron's moons to Unicron, they dance. Ugh...

I always assumed it was in the same vein as the Universal Greeting. The party was used as another way to endear themselves to the Junkions, mainly because they all needed the repairs and ships to face Unicron for the finale. Sure, it's a bit out of place, but then so is Wheelie, a rhyming, childlike Autobot with a space-slingshot.

Although in the UK comic continuity, he's a super-survivalist that helps Wreckgar get off the Quintesson's planet and slaughters Sharkticons like they're nothing.

Aug 24, 2014#65

bhamv3

CynicismKills said:
I always assumed it was in the same vein as the Universal Greeting. The party was used as another way to endear themselves to the Junkions, mainly because they all needed the repairs and ships to face Unicron for the finale. Sure, it's a bit out of place, but then so is Wheelie, a rhyming, childlike Autobot with a space-slingshot.

Although in the UK comic continuity, he's a super-survivalist that helps Wreckgar get off the Quintesson's planet and slaughters Sharkticons like they're nothing.

Whoa, that picture just brought back a nostalgia hit like you wouldn't believe. I think I had that book when I was a kid. What's it called?

Aug 25, 2014#66

CynicismKills

The only name I can find is The Lost Treasure of Cybertron, from '86. Story/coloring book.

Aug 25, 2014#67

bhamv3

CynicismKills said:
The only name I can find is The Lost Treasure of Cybertron, from '86. Story/coloring book.

Think I found it. It's from a book called The Story of Wheelie, the Wild Boy of Quintesson.

Man, I nostalgia'd so hard, I think I grew a mullet.

Aug 25, 2014#68

klew

All Chris Tucker scenes in The Fifth Element (Ruby Rhod = Jar Jar Binks).

Aug 25, 2014#69

Ravenpoe

klew said:
All Chris Tucker scenes in The Fifth Element (Ruby Rhod = Jar Jar Binks).

You shut your heathen mouth. The Rod is God.

Aug 25, 2014#70

ThatNickGuy

Ravenpoe said:
You shut your heathen mouth. The Rod is God.

Now THAT sounds like my prom night! :unibrow:

Aug 25, 2014#71

General Specific

My favorite movie is Star Wars - ANH, ESB, & ROTJ (Original cut, of course)

ANH:
The whole plot hangs on one gunnery commander telling his gunner to NOT shoot an escape pod. They're looking for plans to the Death Star and live in a universe where droids are common, but they don't fire on a life pod of a ship they are trying to capture with all hands because there are no life signs? Really?

ESB:
The whole Luke/Leia kiss thing.

ROTJ:
Ewoks.

Aug 25, 2014#72

PatrThom

Ravenpoe said:
You shut your heathen mouth. The Rod is God.

ThatNickGuy said:
Now THAT sounds like my prom night!

Quiver, ladies! Quiver!

--Patrick
(I took this picture in a grocery parking lot a few months ago, I am never going to get a more appropriate time to use it)

Aug 26, 2014#73

Yoshimickster

King Caesar in Godzilla vs. Mechagodzilla. We wait a whole movie for this god like monster who is supposedly the only thing powerful enough to take out Godzilla...and most of the fight he just jumps out of the way. Fuckin' let down.

Aug 28, 2014#74

Gared

The stupid never-ending love song that starts half way through Top Gun and runs through most of the rest of the movie (not "Danger Zone" and I don't think it's "You've Lost That Lovin' Feelin").

Aug 28, 2014#75

CynicismKills

Gared said:
The stupid never-ending love song that starts half way through Top Gun and runs through most of the rest of the movie (not "Danger Zone" and I don't think it's "You've Lost That Lovin' Feelin").

Take my breath a-waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay

Aug 28, 2014#76

Gared

CynicismKills said:
Take my breath a-waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay

That's the one.

Aug 28, 2014#77

CynicismKills

Yeah I've lost track of how many times I've seen Top Gun. Filmed in and around San Diego, as well as on Miramar where my dad worked for a long time. Plus, the F-14 squadron filmed (The Sundowners) was one of the first squadrons he worked with after joining the Navy.

This all means, of course, that we can't watch the movie without "That's not the right HUD! Those buttons don't fire those missiles! He wasn't outfitted with the correct payloads compared to what he's firing now! That's not how those panels work!" etc.

Aug 28, 2014#78

bhamv3

CynicismKills said:
Take my breath a-waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay

Aaand... stuck in my head now.

Aug 28, 2014#79

PatrThom

CynicismKills said:
Yeah I've lost track of how many times I've seen Top Gun.

0.

But this probably comes as no surprise to anyone.

--Patrick

Aug 28, 2014#80

WasabiPoptart

CynicismKills said:
Yeah I've lost track of how many times I've seen Top Gun. Filmed in and around San Diego, as well as on Miramar where my dad worked for a long time. Plus, the F-14 squadron filmed (The Sundowners) was one of the first squadrons he worked with after joining the Navy.

This all means, of course, that we can't watch the movie without "That's not the right HUD! Those buttons don't fire those missiles! He wasn't outfitted with the correct payloads compared to what he's firing now! That's not how those panels work!" etc.

My husband's not even in aviation and I get to hear all that. It's better for both of us if we don't bother with that movie.

Aug 28, 2014#81

Covar

WasabiPoptart said:
My husband's not even in aviation and I get to hear all that. It's better for both of us if we don't bother with that movie.

Sounds like he's lost that lovin feeling.

Aug 28, 2014#82

Piotyr

Star Wars: A New Hope

How it should have ended touched on this as well, but it made no sense for a planet-destroying battle station to have to go around a planet to reach a rebel base.

Aug 28, 2014#83

Ravenpoe

Piotyr said:
Star Wars: A New Hope

How it should have ended touched on this as well, but it made no sense for a planet-destroying battle station to have to go around a planet to reach a rebel base.

While this is true, it could be explained in that we don't know how often the Death Star can fire that world ending beam. It might have a long recharge.

Of course, being that every tiny minutia in Star Wars has been covered, I'm sure someone out there can tell me -exactly- how often it can fire, and explain to me why I'm wrong.

Aug 28, 2014#84

bhamv3

Ravenpoe said:
While this is true, it could be explained in that we don't know how often the Death Star can fire that world ending beam. It might have a long recharge.

Of course, being that every tiny minutia in Star Wars has been covered, I'm sure someone out there can tell me -exactly- how often it can fire, and explain to me why I'm wrong.

Common consensus is that it takes around 24 terran hours to charge the beam on the original Death Star. The second Death Star was modified to have multiple power reactors, and for the superlaser to be able to fire with lower power (ie, no need to use full power when firing on rebel cruisers), which is why the second Death Star could fire repeatedly in the Battle of Endor.

However, even with a long charge-up time, that still doesn't explain why the first Death Star didn't just blow up Yavin and be done with it. Destroying Yavin would doom the rebels on the moon, either by destroying the moon itself, or by sending it flying off into space now that it has no planet to orbit.

Aug 29, 2014#85

fade

Piotyr said:
Star Wars: A New Hope

How it should have ended touched on this as well, but it made no sense for a planet-destroying battle station to have to go around a planet to reach a rebel base.

There's an official explanation in the Databank because it's been asked so many times. Yavin is a gas giant, and it would've absorbed and dispersed the heat from the superlaser.

Sep 3, 2014#86

AshburnerX

fade said:
There's an official explanation in the Databank because it's been asked so many times. Yavin is a gas giant, and it would've absorbed and dispersed the heat from the superlaser.

Of course, then the question becomes "How is there a habitable moon next to a gas giant?" because I'm pretty sure gas giants usually only form within a certain range beyond the habitable zone of a star. I suppose they could have terraformed it with some alien technology but that sounds like complete bullshit.

Sep 3, 2014#87

drawn_inward

AshburnerX said:
but that sounds like complete bullshit.

But laser swords and the force are quite plausible.

Sep 3, 2014#88

Bowielee

drawn_inward said:
But laser swords and the force are quite plausible.

Mitichlorians, duh.

Sep 3, 2014#89

Ravenpoe

The best thing Disney could do for the new Star Wars:

Ghost of Qui Gon to Obi Won: "Hey, remember when I told you about mitichlorians? Yeah... I was fucking with you."

Sep 3, 2014#90

Mathias

AshburnerX said:
Of course, then the question becomes "How is there a habitable moon next to a gas giant?" because I'm pretty sure gas giants usually only form within a certain range beyond the habitable zone of a star. I suppose they could have terraformed it with some alien technology but that sounds like complete bullshit.

Oh! My time to shine! Gas giant moons can be habitable! Whether it's habitable by humanoids like us is another question. Liquid water exists in huge quantities on Jupiter's moon Europa. The tidal forces from Jupiter keep the moon's core very active which (like on Earth) provides heat in deep ocean vents.

One idea bouncing around Jupiter is it's thought to actually be a unique gas giant that was pushed back to its current orbit by another giant that got absorbed into the Sun. Originally Jupiter was thought to have formed and orbited much closer to the Sun, as the general observation of exoplanets has shown many gas giants in the 'habitable' zone of their star. Who's to say the rocky moons of such planets don't exhibit Earth like conditions?

Sep 3, 2014#91

PatrThom

Bowielee said:
Mitichlorians, duh.

Every time someone says "midichlorians" it just makes me think someone's bloodstream must be full of these guys:

--Patrick

Sep 3, 2014#92

MindDetective

Personally, I didn't hate midichlorians. The strongest argument I've heard against their inclusion (stronger than "you hurt my nostalgia!") was that they weren't necessary to the story; that they didn't add anything. Even then, I think I disagree, since they demonstrate well Jedi existing in a different time than the original trilogy, a time in which science and technology are advanced, and knowledge of the workings of their universe is deep.

Sep 3, 2014#93

bhamv3

I like the Darths and Droids take on midichlorians. If they're in Jedi blood, then they can be transferred via blood transfusion. Qui-Gon injected some of his blood into Anakin, who had been a completely normal boy, in order to help him win the podrace.

Qui-Gon basically created Darth Vader to win a bet.

Sep 3, 2014#94

Bowielee

The problem with mitichloreans is that that take something that was originally a mystical concept and turned it into a scientific one.

Sep 3, 2014#95

CynicismKills

Bowielee said:
The problem with mitichloreans is that that take something that was originally a mystical concept and turned it into a scientific one.

Somewhere out there Han Solo is smiling.

Sep 3, 2014#96

Bowielee

It's kind of like replacing God with Skynet.

Sep 3, 2014#97

phil

bhamv3 said:
I'm sure you guys are familiar with the theory that Superman isn't actually reversing the spin of the Earth in that scene. He's flying so fast he's going back in time, which results in the Earth's spin reversing.

* Superman starts flying in the opposite direction that the earth is moving
*The earth slows down, stops and starts going the other way
*Once he gets back to the point where he wants to be, he stops flying around it.
*Note that the earth is still going in the wrong direction
*Superman starts flying in the opposite direction to get the earth rotating back in the original direction it was going.

Superman made the earth spin in the other direction and THAT was how he went back in time.

AND ANOTHER THING

Superman goes back in time to save Lois. WHAT ABOUT THE MISSLES? Aren't those in flight again? Aren't those cities with millions of people in danger again?

Christopher Reeve is great. Superman is great. This aspect of the superman movie ruins it for me. FOR ME. YOU ARE STILL ALLOWED TO LIKE SOMETHING I DON'T LIKE. Yes, I do have to clarify this point.

Sep 3, 2014#98

Hailey Knight

phil said:
* Superman starts flying in the opposite direction that the earth is moving
*The earth slows down, stops and starts going the other way
*Once he gets back to the point where he wants to be, he stops flying around it.
*Note that the earth is still going in the wrong direction
*Superman starts flying in the opposite direction to get the earth rotating back in the original direction it was going.

Superman made the earth spin in the other direction and THAT was how he went back in time.

AND ANOTHER THING

Superman goes back in time to save Lois. WHAT ABOUT THE MISSLES? Aren't those in flight again? Aren't those cities with millions of people in danger again?

Christopher Reeve is great. Superman is great. This aspect of the superman movie ruins it for me. FOR ME. YOU ARE STILL ALLOWED TO LIKE SOMETHING I DON'T LIKE. Yes, I do have to clarify this point.

Superman is still stopping the missiles. He's gone back in time, but his past self is still there stopping the missiles.

Sep 3, 2014#99

fade

Bowielee said:
The problem with mitichloreans is that that take something that was originally a mystical concept and turned it into a scientific one.

Yeah that was my problem. It killed the mystery, not my nostalgia. It was like it flattened the Jedi as a character type. That and the explanation felt weak.

Sep 3, 2014#100

Bowielee

phil said:
* Superman starts flying in the opposite direction that the earth is moving
*The earth slows down, stops and starts going the other way
*Once he gets back to the point where he wants to be, he stops flying around it.
*Note that the earth is still going in the wrong direction
*Superman starts flying in the opposite direction to get the earth rotating back in the original direction it was going.

Superman made the earth spin in the other direction and THAT was how he went back in time.

AND ANOTHER THING

Superman goes back in time to save Lois. WHAT ABOUT THE MISSLES? Aren't those in flight again? Aren't those cities with millions of people in danger again?

Christopher Reeve is great. Superman is great. This aspect of the superman movie ruins it for me. FOR ME. YOU ARE STILL ALLOWED TO LIKE SOMETHING I DON'T LIKE. Yes, I do have to clarify this point.

I'm actually not the biggest fan of the first Superman movie. Superman 2 is where it's at.[DOUBLEPOST=1409803203,1409803154][/DOUBLEPOST]

Zero Esc said:
Superman is still stopping the missiles. He's gone back in time, but his past self is still there stopping the missiles.

But then there are two Supermen forever, unless he just kills himself when he catches up to himself.

Sep 3, 2014#101

Hailey Knight

Bowielee said:
I'm actually not the biggest fan of the first Superman movie. Superman 2 is where it's at.[DOUBLEPOST=1409803203,1409803154][/DOUBLEPOST]

But then there are two Supermen forever, unless he just kills himself when he catches up to himself.

Yeah, I guess that doesn't make sense. I had thought it that past Superman would then have to go back, but that doesn't make any sense since he wouldn't need to.

I have no idea what happened to the missiles then.

Sep 3, 2014#102

MindDetective

fade said:
Yeah that was my problem. It killed the mystery, not my nostalgia. It was like it flattened the Jedi as a character type. That and the explanation felt weak.

It didn't add anything explanatory whatsoever, though, so there is still plenty of room for mystery.

Sep 4, 2014#103

Ravenpoe

Bowielee said:
But then there are two Supermen forever, unless he just kills himself when he catches up to himself.

I can't believe I'm about to defend this ridiculous bit of bad movie writing, but there wouldn't be two supermen forever. Past Superman would eventually catch up and then go back in time to enact the plan.

Sep 4, 2014#104

phil

Ravenpoe said:
I can't believe I'm about to defend this ridiculous bit of bad movie writing, but there wouldn't be two supermen forever. Past Superman would eventually catch up and then go back in time to enact the plan.

But there aren't two supermen. Superman is immune from the time travel effects. In fact, Superman is not going back in time at all. Superman is sending the rest of the earth back in time instead.

Sep 4, 2014#105

Hailey Knight

Ravenpoe said:
I can't believe I'm about to defend this ridiculous bit of bad movie writing, but there wouldn't be two supermen forever. Past Superman would eventually catch up and then go back in time to enact the plan.

But Lois would be rescued, so he wouldn't go back in time to save her.

Sep 4, 2014#106

Mathias

Bowielee said:
The problem with mitichloreans is that that take something that was originally a mystical concept and turned it into a scientific one.

I like this approach to the problem: http://www.starwarsreport.com/2012/...on-those-controversial-microscopic-lifeforms/

Sep 4, 2014#107

fade

MindDetective said:
It didn't add anything explanatory whatsoever, though, so there is still plenty of room for mystery.

It didn't give a mechanism for how the mitichlorians do what they do, but it does say that the force is caused by microscopic organisms in your body. That's pretty explanatory to me. It carries with it a ton of implication. Mainly that it's a biological thing and not mystical.

Sep 4, 2014#108

MindDetective

But it isn't explained as being biological, just that there is a biological connection.

Sep 4, 2014#109

@Li3n

MindDetective said:
But it isn't explained as being biological, just that there is a biological connection.

Except the dialogue used clearly stated that midichlorians cause the Force...

If they had just said that the more force you can wield the more midichlorians you have and left the connection more vague it would have been way less of a slap in the face for most people imo.

Sep 4, 2014#110

MindDetective

@Li3n said:
Except the dialogue used clearly stated that midichlorians cause the Force...

If they had just said that the more force you can wield the more midichlorians you have and left the connection more vague it would have been way less of a slap in the face for most people imo.

No, not caused at all. More like a conduit.

"Without the midi-chlorians, life could not exist, and we would have no knowledge of the Force. They continually speak to you, telling you the will of the Force. When you learn to quiet your mind, you will hear them speaking to you."

Sep 4, 2014#111

Ravenpoe

Blow-dart full of antibiotics. Bam, perfect Jedi neutralizer.

Sep 4, 2014#112

MindDetective

Ravenpoe said:
Blow-dart full of antibiotics. Bam, perfect Jedi neutralizer.

They aren't bacteria. They live *inside* cells. More like mitochondria.

Sep 4, 2014#113

PatrThom

MindDetective said:
They aren't bacteria. They live *inside* cells. More like mitochondria.

Soo...it's like an alternate version of Parasite Eve?

--Patrick

Sep 4, 2014#114

fade

See that just sets the bar for "unexplained" one notch lower, in which case everything is eventually mysterious and unexplained.

Sep 4, 2014#115

Null

PatrThom said:
Soo...it's like an alternate version of Parasite Eve?

--Patrick

That is exactly what came to mind when I heard that line.

Forums