I’ll go first. Mine is that I can’t stand the Deadpool movies. They are self aware and self referential to an obnoxious degree. It’s like being continually reminded that I am in a movie. I swear the success of that movie has directly lead to every blockbuster having to have a joke every 30 seconds

  • trainsaresexy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    12 hours ago

    Dennis Villeneuve is currently untouchable in the same way that Christoper Nolan was a few years ago. For whatever reason I meshed with Nolan’s work at the time but I have been completely disenchanted by Villeneuve since Blade Runner.

  • Hyperreality@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    10 months ago

    Tarantino is overrated. You have to watch a lot of movies to come to this realisation, because otherwise you don’t realise his movies are often in large part a collage of other movies. Movies which did what he does better. That means that it doesn’t actually matter that Tarantino is overrated for most movie goers. More generally, this is why critics’ opinions don’t actually matter that much. They’ve watched too many movies and likely know too much about movies, to tell the average audience goer if they’ll enjoy a movie.

    Once you’ve watched a few thousand movies, and especially if you’ve ever studied film or read a few books about it, you’ll often find you enjoy interesting but shit movies more, than very well made but unoriginal movies. People who truly love film, invariably aren’t snobs. They enjoy absolute trash, they enjoy arty farty stuff. If someone has a related degree or even a doctorate or works in the industry, the likelihood is high that they’re also a fan of B-movies. They don’t need to pretend to be knowledgeable, because they are. A film snob will bore you with the details of a Tarkovski movie. A cinephile is more likely to bang on about 80s horror movies, lesbian vampire sexploitation movies, Albert Pyun’s Cyborg, or Troma’s The Toxic Avenger.

      • Hyperreality@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        Oh, wow. Old comment.

        The easiest route to learning about movies, is to watch a lot of movies, and reading about the movie you’ve just watched. Wikipedia, a more in depth review, interviews with people who made the movie (not just the actors).

        Google a top 100 list. Work your way through a few of them. Eg.

        https://www.bfi.org.uk/sight-and-sound/greatest-films-all-time

        They also have cool features. For example, Michael Mann’s made a load of really cool action movies. Here’s a feature on his movies they made:

        https://www.bfi.org.uk/features/where-begin-with-michael-mann

        Or here’s famous critic Mark Kermode’s top 10 of horror movies:

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qdj_22hHRyM

        Yes, he has a PhD and is a member of the British Academy of Film and Television Arts, the UK equivalent of the Academy of Motion Pictures. No, he’s not a snob. Texas Chainsaw Massacre’s in the top 10. So are some older classics, which are still good.

        But if you want to read something, you could try:

        Bordwell and Thompson. Film Art: An Introduction.

        David A. Cook. A History of Narrative Cinema

        • legendarydromedary@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          Wow, thank you so much for all the recommendations! I sometimes feel like I don’t know how to watch certain kinds of movies (e.g., older movies, or more artsy movies). I hope reading up a bit will help me appreciate them more

      • MacN'Cheezus@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        Hmm, so I like movies that kinda play with your expectations and turn out to go into a completely different direction than you’d expect.

        Dragon (2011) with Donnie Yen is a good example. You think you’re getting another Kung Fu flick, but it turns out to be more of a detective story of almost Sherlock Holmes-style complexity.

        Yes there’s kung fu but it’s mostly esoteric and there’s only a few fights, but it’s still a fascinating movie.

  • fireweed@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    10 months ago

    The Mario movie was incredibly mediocre, despite its high production value. I’m talking MCU-levels of truckloads of money spent with shockingly little to show for it.

  • Labototmized@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    10 months ago

    Films where I don’t recognize a single actor among the whole crew are almost always better than ones where I’ve seen such and such actor in other movies. Just more immersive. And even if they’re not the best actors I’d much prefer that over whatever the hell Chris Prat or Tom Cruise or Leo D are up to.

    • ValiantDust@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      I knew being faceblind must have some benefit. I often only realise I know an actor when I see their name in the credits. Then again it can take me half a movie to realise there are two men with dark hair, a beard and glasses, so I wouldn’t entirety recommend it.

      • EatBeans@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        My experience watching The Departed while almost entirely sober felt like a face blindness simulator. I was baffled when one of the characters that had been killed came back and none of the other characters acknowledged it. Cool movie but so confusing.

      • psud@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        Tom Cruise has employees rewrite movies he’ll be in to make his part more, and more in his style.

        He has more acting range and ability than so many other actors

  • SkepticalButOpenMinded@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    10 months ago

    The critic rating is better than the audience rating. I’ve never seen a film with a high critic rating that didn’t have something worthwhile about it. But I’ve seen a lot of audience hits that were garbage.

  • qooqie@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    Horror films are where art flourishes and it has a huge culture of being outside of Hollywood which is just a plus. Also the acting is usually way better

  • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    Santa Claus Conquers the Martians is a cyberpunk movie.

    Mars is a dystopian, broken society in which cyberware is so ubiquitous that we only ever see one Martian without visible augmentation. Every character in the movie does what they do for purely selfish reasons, with the exception of the idiot Droppo, the old man Chochem who remembers society for what it was before it went to hell, and the mythological embodiment of generosity himself. When Chochem suggests that Mars needs a Santa Claus, the immediate response isn’t to research and emulate St. Nick, nope. Martian society is so degenerate that the first idea is to commit a crime: to kidnap the jolly old elf. And all of Earth’s governments are incapable of stopping them.

    Cyberware, broken society, selfish characters, rampant crime, laughably inadequate government? What genre does that sound like?

    When I pointed out that Santa Claus Conquers the Martians predates Blade Runner, the film that most people consider to be the first cyberpunk movie, by some 18 years, at a tabletop session of Cyberpunk 2020, I was less than popular with those assembled.

    I decided to not press my luck by pointing out that it came out 4 years before the book Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep.

    Hooray for Santy Claus.

  • stackPeek@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    Zack Snyder’s Batman v Superman was good. I geniunely don’t understand it’s hated so much, like for real

    • stackPeek@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      I watched The Batman on IMAX on my birthday, although I was just a bit disappointed with the quality of the projector, I was mind blown by the audio!!! The audio on the chase scene especially!!!

    • golli@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      For me it depends. Some movies benefit more from the big screen than others. For example I went to see both Avatar movies in the cinema since those specifically shine because of their effects. With many other movies I agree that a good home cinema leaves little to be desired.

      The other reason why I sometimes like the cinema experience is because it forces me to pay more attention and not get distracted. That might be a self-discipline issue, but this way i don’t randomly pick up my phone or similar. itespecially helps me appreciate longer slow movies more. For example something like “drive my car” (almost 3h long) that I glad I caught in the cinema when it came out

  • DeepGradientAscent@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    They are self aware and self referential to an obnoxious degree.

    The thing is, they’re supposed to be that way. The comics were like that too.

    I agree that it’s bad that a lot of writers and directors want their film to be “Deadpool-esque”.

  • Pratai@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    Mine is- the Marvel/DC superhero movies all but entirely ruined cinema.