lizzpop2003

lizzpop2003 t1_jegkq6y wrote

I guess, but then I'd have to actually deal with someone there, outside of the 2 seconds it takes the guy to scan my phone. The beauty of it all being on my phone is I don't have to deal with lines or kids with bad attitudes anymore. Atthe theater I go to I even order my concessions on my phone and just go to the counter to pick it up when it tells me they're ready.

1

lizzpop2003 t1_jege2yn wrote

If you found Parasite disappointing, that seems very much like a problem with you and how you manage expectations. I had none for Parasite, and I adored that movie. Similar experience for Everything Everywhere All At Once.

Don't expect anything except to be entertained, and you will find so much more to love in the world of entertainment.

15

lizzpop2003 t1_ja2gdy0 wrote

You should watch the second one. While there is more gore to it, it's a legitimately good film that builds on what the first one set up well and has some excellent twists and turns. After that, they get too convoluted and more obsessed with the spectacle of it, but the second one is still just trying to be a good movie.

18

lizzpop2003 t1_j6n9e2r wrote

Wait, you are saying, somehow, that Jackie Brown, a literal masterpiece, is the equivalent of a movie that hasn't even come out yet but there was so much drama in its production it ended up being directed by Louis freaking Leterrier and if was preceded by a film that was so ridiculously stupid it was unbelievable that there is not a remote chance it is anything more than mind-numbingly stupid????

2

lizzpop2003 t1_j68puu3 wrote

Not that this is 100% of it, but there are a lot of butthurt fanboys that are determined to hate anything he does no matter what. Take a look at the actual negative reviews of knives out. Most of them talk about it like it's the worst thing that's ever been made ever and that Rian is the worst human on the planet. There's just so many more positive reviews from the average joe movie goer that it mostly cancels them out.

As per Pokerface, it's on a streaming service that isn't terribly popular so there's a good chance that not a lot of people have seen it yet. In fact, I'm willing to bet that a sizeable percentage of the viewer reviews that are there are from people in the butthurt fanboy group that haven't even seen it.

6

lizzpop2003 t1_j2fuy0f wrote

Wrong movie. Ron Howard had nothing to do with Rogue One. He took over on Solo.

Reportedly the things they made Edwards change on Rogue One, while big, were more in the vein of rearranging and adding more emotional weight to the last act battle, but he stayed onboard the whole time.

20

lizzpop2003 t1_j20s7ie wrote

The problem there is that both movies were not very successful and, while they did make money, they didn't make enough to not be considered a dissapointment by Disney. There's also the followup show that, while it definitely has its fans, did not attract many viewers when it was airing at all. All of them have only reached widespread viewership and fandom over time. Couple that with the fact that a movie in this world would necessarily have to be expensive (much like Avatar it wouldn't really fit in the series if new movies didn't push new technology forward) a new movie is a massive risk when there is no guarantee of big returns.

1

lizzpop2003 t1_iyek71q wrote

They are both very good films. In The Heights has excellent music, some great characters and some really unique set pieces to bolster a sort of mediocre story.

West Side Story also has excellent music, great characters and unique set pieces but the story is stronger and the cinematography is amazing.

So West Side Story is probably "better" but they are both really great. I would also recommend Tick, Tick .... Boom!, another musical from last year that I actually think is better than both of the other two. Andrew Garfield is absolutely amazing in it. It's the directorial debut of Lin Manuel Miranda and it is excellently done.

6

lizzpop2003 t1_iyclvuj wrote

I disagree with the suggestion that watching the extended editions will make it better to you. The extended editions are wonderful for people who love the movies and want more of that world, but they don't add anything substantial that changes them in an appreciable manner. It's just more time in that world. There's a few scenes in them that are great but they don't really add anything, they more just accentuate what's already there.

If you don't like them, you don't like them, and that's all cool. But just from a technical standpoint they were groundbreaking films, and being filmed back to back gave them a narrative consistency that is hard to beat in any trilogy.

4

lizzpop2003 t1_iychqji wrote

Agreed. I love that movie. For a similar vibe but with a twist, the recent The Lost City with Sandra Bullock was pretty good. It felt like a spiritual successor to Romancing The Stone to me.

12